Re: [PATCH v4] mm/oom_kill: change comment and rename is_dump_unreclaim_slabs()

[Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>]

On Sat 31-10-20 02:27:04, Hui Su wrote:
> Change the comment of is_dump_unreclaim_slabs(), it just check
> whether nr_unreclaimable slabs amount is greater than user
> memory, and explain why we dump unreclaim slabs.
> 
> Rename it to should_dump_unreclaim_slab() maybe better.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hui Su <sh_def@163.com>

Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>

Thanks!

> ---
>  mm/oom_kill.c | 14 ++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index 8b84661a6410..04b19b7b5435 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -170,11 +170,13 @@ static bool oom_unkillable_task(struct task_struct *p)
>  	return false;
>  }
>  
> -/*
> - * Print out unreclaimble slabs info when unreclaimable slabs amount is greater
> - * than all user memory (LRU pages)
> - */
> -static bool is_dump_unreclaim_slabs(void)
> +/**
> + * Check whether unreclaimable slab amount is greater than
> + * all user memory(LRU pages).
> + * dump_unreclaimable_slab() could help in the case that
> + * oom due to too much unreclaimable slab used by kernel.
> +*/
> +static bool should_dump_unreclaim_slab(void)
>  {
>  	unsigned long nr_lru;
>  
> @@ -463,7 +465,7 @@ static void dump_header(struct oom_control *oc, struct task_struct *p)
>  		mem_cgroup_print_oom_meminfo(oc->memcg);
>  	else {
>  		show_mem(SHOW_MEM_FILTER_NODES, oc->nodemask);
> -		if (is_dump_unreclaim_slabs())
> +		if (should_dump_unreclaim_slab())
>  			dump_unreclaimable_slab();
>  	}
>  	if (sysctl_oom_dump_tasks)
> -- 
> 2.29.0
> 
> 

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs