On Wed 11-05-16 16:52:41, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 May 2016 16:44:07 Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 11-05-16 15:24:44, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > A recent rework of the compaction code introduced a warning about
> > > an uninitialized variable when CONFIG_COMPACTION is disabled and
> > > __alloc_pages_direct_compact() does not set its 'compact_result'
> > > output argument:
> > >
> > > mm/page_alloc.c: In function '__alloc_pages_nodemask':
> > > mm/page_alloc.c:3651:6: error: 'compact_result' may be used uninitialized
> > > in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
> > >
> > > This adds another check for CONFIG_COMPACTION to ensure we never
> > > evaluate the uninitialized variable in this configuration, which
> > > is probably the simplest way to avoid the warning.
> >
> > I think that hiding this into __alloc_pages_direct_compact is a better
> > idea. See the diff below
>
> Ok, sounds good.
>
> > ---
> > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > index 4950d01ff935..14e3b4d93adc 100644
> > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -3300,6 +3300,7 @@ __alloc_pages_direct_compact(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned
> > int order,
> > unsigned int alloc_flags, const struct alloc_context *ac,
> > enum migrate_mode mode, enum compact_result *compact_result)
> > {
> > + *compact_result = COMPACT_DEFERRED;
> > return NULL;
> > }
> >
>
> I thought about this but didn't know which COMPACT_* value was appropriate
> here.
>
> The behavior then changes a bit with your approach compared to mine,
> because
>
> if (compact_result == COMPACT_DEFERRED)
> goto nopage;
>
> is true now. I assume this is what we want though.
No, we actually want to try to reclaim, that's why COMPACT_SKIPPED is
more appropriate. COMPACT_SKIPPED is even correct semantically because
the compaction wasn't invoked.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
