All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, vbabka@suse.cz, mhocko@suse.com,
	willy@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm/page_alloc: bail out on fatal signal during reclaim/compaction retry attempt
Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 21:34:55 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210519213455.97ff95f0124b4120787f8314@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210519201743.3260890-1-atomlin@redhat.com>

On Wed, 19 May 2021 21:17:43 +0100 Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com> wrote:

> It does not make sense to retry compaction when a fatal signal is
> pending.

Well, it might make sense.  Presumably it is beneficial to other tasks.

> In the context of try_to_compact_pages(), indeed COMPACT_SKIPPED can be
> returned; albeit, not every zone, on the zone list, would be considered
> in the case a fatal signal is found to be pending.
> Yet, in should_compact_retry(), given the last known compaction result,
> each zone, on the zone list, can be considered/or checked
> (see compaction_zonelist_suitable()). For example, if a zone was found
> to succeed, then reclaim/compaction would be tried again
> (notwithstanding the above).
> 
> This patch ensures that compaction is not needlessly retried
> irrespective of the last known compaction result e.g. if it was skipped,
> in the unlikely case a fatal signal is found pending.
> So, OOM is at least attempted.

What observed problems motivated this change?

What were the observed runtime effects of this change?

  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-20  4:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-19 19:23 [PATCH v2] mm/page_alloc: bail out on fatal signal during reclaim/compaction retry attempt Aaron Tomlin
2021-05-19 19:32 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-05-19 19:48   ` Aaron Tomlin
2021-05-19 20:17   ` [PATCH v3] " Aaron Tomlin
2021-05-20  4:34     ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2021-05-20 10:20       ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-05-20 11:42         ` Aaron Tomlin
2021-05-20 11:56           ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-05-20 13:30             ` Aaron Tomlin
2021-05-20 14:29             ` [PATCH v4] " Aaron Tomlin
2021-05-28 12:53               ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-05-31 11:33               ` Michal Hocko
2021-05-31 11:35                 ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-05-31 13:21                   ` Michal Hocko
2021-05-20 11:09       ` [PATCH v3] " Matthew Wilcox

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=20210519213455.97ff95f0124b4120787f8314@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=atomlin@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=willy@infradead.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.