From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>,
aarcange@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, hughd@google.com,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: kswapd stuck using 100% CPU
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 14:56:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120326135609.GM1007@csn.ul.ie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOJsxLGcoxxdhe2sNmAbC2e5afnZm9960XxBjY+QoCoc0RRb2w@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 01:40:41PM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 10:26:21AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >>
> >> Only test compaction_suitable if the kernel is built with CONFIG_COMPACTION,
> >> otherwise the stub compaction_suitable function will always return
> >> COMPACT_SKIPPED and send kswapd into an infinite loop.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> >> Reported-by: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
> >
> > Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
>
> The API looks fragile and this patch isn't exactly making it any
> better. Why don't we make compaction_suitable() return something other
> than COMPACT_SKIPPED for !CONFIG_COMPACTION case?
>
Returning COMPACT_PARTIAL or COMPACT_CONTINUE would confuse the check in
should_continue_reclaim. A fourth return type could be added but an
obvious name does not spring to mind that would end up being similar to
just adding a CONFIG_COMPACTION check.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-26 13:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-24 2:03 kswapd stuck using 100% CPU Anton Blanchard
2012-03-24 14:26 ` [PATCH] " Rik van Riel
2012-03-25 19:16 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-26 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2012-03-26 10:40 ` Pekka Enberg
2012-03-26 13:56 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2012-03-26 15:10 ` Pekka Enberg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120326135609.GM1007@csn.ul.ie \
--to=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).