Hi Joonsoo,
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 12:17:14PM +0900, js1...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo....@lge.com>
>
> Freepage on ZONE_HIGHMEM doesn't work for kernel memory so it's not that
> important to reserve. When ZONE_MOVABLE is used, this problem would
> theorectically cause to decrease usable memory for GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE
> allocation request which is mainly used for page cache and anon page
> allocation. So, fix it.
>
> And, defining sysctl_lowmem_reserve_ratio array by MAX_NR_ZONES - 1 size
> makes code complex. For example, if there is highmem system, following
> reserve ratio is activated for *NORMAL ZONE* which would be easyily
> misleading people.
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHMEM
> 32
> #endif
>
> This patch also fix this situation by defining sysctl_lowmem_reserve_ratio
> array by MAX_NR_ZONES and place "#ifdef" to right place.
>
> Reviewed-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.ku...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vba...@suse.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo....@lge.com>
> ---
> include/linux/mmzone.h | 2 +-
> mm/page_alloc.c | 11 ++++++-----
> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h
> index ebaccd4..96194bf 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
> @@ -869,7 +869,7 @@ int min_free_kbytes_sysctl_handler(struct ctl_table *,
> int,
> void __user *, size_t *, loff_t *);
> int watermark_scale_factor_sysctl_handler(struct ctl_table *, int,
> void __user *, size_t *, loff_t *);
> -extern int sysctl_lowmem_reserve_ratio[MAX_NR_ZONES-1];
> +extern int sysctl_lowmem_reserve_ratio[MAX_NR_ZONES];
> int lowmem_reserve_ratio_sysctl_handler(struct ctl_table *, int,
> void __user *, size_t *, loff_t *);
> int percpu_pagelist_fraction_sysctl_handler(struct ctl_table *, int,
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 32b31d6..60ffa4e 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -203,17 +203,18 @@ static void __free_pages_ok(struct page *page, unsigned
> int order);
> * TBD: should special case ZONE_DMA32 machines here - in those we normally
> * don't need any ZONE_NORMAL reservation
> */
> -int sysctl_lowmem_reserve_ratio[MAX_NR_ZONES-1] = {
> +int sysctl_lowmem_reserve_ratio[MAX_NR_ZONES] = {
> #ifdef CONFIG_ZONE_DMA
> - 256,
> + [ZONE_DMA] = 256,
> #endif
> #ifdef CONFIG_ZONE_DMA32
> - 256,
> + [ZONE_DMA32] = 256,
> #endif
> + [ZONE_NORMAL] = 32,
> #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHMEM
> - 32,
> + [ZONE_HIGHMEM] = INT_MAX,
> #endif
> - 32,
> + [ZONE_MOVABLE] = INT_MAX,
> };
We need to update lowmem_reserve_ratio in Documentation/sysctl/vm.txt.
And to me, INT_MAX is rather awkward.
# cat /proc/sys/vm/lowmem_reserve_ratio
256 256 32 2147483647 2147483647
What do you think about to use 0 or -1 as special meaning
instead 2147483647?
Anyway, it could be separate patch regardless of zone_cma
so I hope Andrew to merge this patch regardless of other patches
in this patchset.
Thanks.
