From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752760AbbC0Ce5 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 26 Mar 2015 22:34:57 -0400
Received: from mail-pd0-f179.google.com ([209.85.192.179]:36249 "EHLO
	mail-pd0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752272AbbC0Ce4 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 26 Mar 2015 22:34:56 -0400
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 11:34:48 +0900
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com, ngupta@vflare.org,
        sfr@canb.auug.org.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [withdrawn]
 zsmalloc-remove-extra-cond_resched-in-__zs_compact.patch removed from -mm
 tree
Message-ID: <20150327023448.GC26725@blaptop>
References: <5513199f.t25SPuX5ULuM6JS8%akpm@linux-foundation.org>
 <20150326002717.GA1669@swordfish>
 <20150326073916.GB26725@blaptop>
 <20150326081313.GB1669@swordfish>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150326081313.GB1669@swordfish>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 05:13:13PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (03/26/15 16:39), Minchan Kim wrote:
> > Hello Sergey,
> > 
> > Sorry for slow response.
> > I am overwhelmed with too much to do. :(
> > 
> 
> Hello,
> sure, no problem.
> 
> > > > diff -puN mm/zsmalloc.c~zsmalloc-remove-extra-cond_resched-in-__zs_compact mm/zsmalloc.c
> > > > --- a/mm/zsmalloc.c~zsmalloc-remove-extra-cond_resched-in-__zs_compact
> > > > +++ a/mm/zsmalloc.c
> > > > @@ -1717,8 +1717,6 @@ static unsigned long __zs_compact(struct
> > > >  	struct page *dst_page = NULL;
> > > >  	unsigned long nr_total_migrated = 0;
> > > >  
> > > > -	cond_resched();
> > > > -
> > > >  	spin_lock(&class->lock);
> > > >  	while ((src_page = isolate_source_page(class))) {
> 
> > 
> > If we removed cond_resched out of outer loop(ie, your patch), we lose
> > the chance to reschedule if alloc_target_page fails(ie, there is no
> > zspage in ZS_ALMOST_FULL and ZS_ALMOST_EMPTY).
> 
> 
> in outer loop we have preemption enabled and unlocked class. wouldn't that help?
> (hm, UP system?)

It depends on preemption model. If you enable full preemption, you are right
but if you enable just voluntary preemption, cond_resched will help latency.

Thanks.

-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim