From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752887AbaHKJXz (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2014 05:23:55 -0400 Received: from e28smtp06.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.6]:60793 "EHLO e28smtp06.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751671AbaHKJXx (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2014 05:23:53 -0400 From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" To: Joonsoo Kim , Andrew Morton Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Rik van Riel , Mel Gorman , Johannes Weiner , Minchan Kim , Yasuaki Ishimatsu , Zhang Yanfei , "Srivatsa S. Bhat" , Tang Chen , Naoya Horiguchi , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Wen Congyang , Marek Szyprowski , Michal Nazarewicz , Laura Abbott , Heesub Shin , Ritesh Harjani , t.stanislaws@samsung.com, Gioh Kim , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Joonsoo Kim Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] mm/isolation: remove unstable check for isolated page In-Reply-To: <1407309517-3270-4-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> References: <1407309517-3270-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> <1407309517-3270-4-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.18.1 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.91.1 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 14:53:35 +0530 Message-ID: <87a97b5qi0.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 14081109-9574-0000-0000-0000008D54FC Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Joonsoo Kim writes: > The check '!PageBuddy(page) && page_count(page) == 0 && > migratetype == MIGRATE_ISOLATE' would mean the page on free processing. > Although it could go into buddy allocator within a short time, > futher operation such as isolate_freepages_range() in CMA, called after > test_page_isolated_in_pageblock(), could be failed due to this unstability > since it requires that the page is on buddy. I think that removing > this unstability is good thing. Is that true in case of check_pages_isolated_cb ? Does that require PageBuddy to be true ? > > And, following patch makes isolated freepage has new status matched with > this condition and this check is the obstacle to that change. So remove > it. Can you quote the patch summary in the above case ? ie, something like And the followiing patch "mm/....." makes isolate freepage. -aneesh From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pd0-f174.google.com (mail-pd0-f174.google.com [209.85.192.174]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8B6C6B0035 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 05:23:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f174.google.com with SMTP id fp1so10443378pdb.19 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 02:23:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e28smtp06.in.ibm.com (e28smtp06.in.ibm.com. [122.248.162.6]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id pf8si9391958pdb.149.2014.08.11.02.23.51 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 11 Aug 2014 02:23:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from /spool/local by e28smtp06.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 14:53:48 +0530 Received: from d28relay05.in.ibm.com (d28relay05.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.62]) by d28dlp01.in.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D818E0019 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 14:55:44 +0530 (IST) Received: from d28av02.in.ibm.com (d28av02.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.64]) by d28relay05.in.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id s7B9O9Gi1376750 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 14:54:10 +0530 Received: from d28av02.in.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d28av02.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id s7B9NgqY004774 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 14:53:44 +0530 From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] mm/isolation: remove unstable check for isolated page In-Reply-To: <1407309517-3270-4-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> References: <1407309517-3270-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> <1407309517-3270-4-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 14:53:35 +0530 Message-ID: <87a97b5qi0.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Joonsoo Kim , Andrew Morton Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Rik van Riel , Mel Gorman , Johannes Weiner , Minchan Kim , Yasuaki Ishimatsu , Zhang Yanfei , "Srivatsa S. Bhat" , Tang Chen , Naoya Horiguchi , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Wen Congyang , Marek Szyprowski , Michal Nazarewicz , Laura Abbott , Heesub Shin , Ritesh Harjani , t.stanislaws@samsung.com, Gioh Kim , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Joonsoo Kim writes: > The check '!PageBuddy(page) && page_count(page) == 0 && > migratetype == MIGRATE_ISOLATE' would mean the page on free processing. > Although it could go into buddy allocator within a short time, > futher operation such as isolate_freepages_range() in CMA, called after > test_page_isolated_in_pageblock(), could be failed due to this unstability > since it requires that the page is on buddy. I think that removing > this unstability is good thing. Is that true in case of check_pages_isolated_cb ? Does that require PageBuddy to be true ? > > And, following patch makes isolated freepage has new status matched with > this condition and this check is the obstacle to that change. So remove > it. Can you quote the patch summary in the above case ? ie, something like And the followiing patch "mm/....." makes isolate freepage. -aneesh -- 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/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org