(2012/08/11 2:28), Michal Hocko wrote:
On Sat 11-08-12 01:49:25, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
(2012/08/11 0:42), Michal Hocko wrote:
On Thu 09-08-12 17:01:10, Glauber Costa wrote:
[...]
@@ -2317,18 +2318,18 @@ static int mem_cgroup_do_charge(struct mem_cgroup
*memcg, gfp_t gfp_mask,
} else
mem_over_limit = mem_cgroup_from_res_counter(fail_res, res);
/*
- * nr_pages can be either a huge page (HPAGE_PMD_NR), a batch
- * of regular pages (CHARGE_BATCH), or a single regular page (1).
- *
* Never reclaim on behalf of optional batching, retry with a
* single page instead.
*/
- if (nr_pages == CHARGE_BATCH)
+ if (nr_pages > min_pages)
return CHARGE_RETRY;
This is dangerous because THP charges will be retried now while they
previously failed with CHARGE_NOMEM which means that we will keep
attempting potentially endlessly.
with THP, I thought nr_pages == min_pages, and no retry.
right you are.
Why cannot we simply do if (nr_pages < CHARGE_BATCH) and get rid of the
min_pages altogether?
Hm, I think a slab can be larger than CHARGE_BATCH.
Also the comment doesn't seem to be valid anymore.
I agree it's not clean. Because our assumption on nr_pages are changed,
I think this behavior should not depend on nr_pages value..
Shouldn't we have a flag to indicate "trial-for-batched charge" ?
dunno, it would require a new parameter anyway (because abusing gfp
doesn't seem great idea).
ok, agreed.
-Kame
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@openvz.org
https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel