Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-135054-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2024 10:38:34 +0200
From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
To: liuhailong@oppo.com
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, nathan@kernel.org, ndesaulniers@google.com,
	trix@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	llvm@lists.linux.dev, surenb@google.com, zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com,
	quic_charante@quicinc.com, yuzhao@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: vmscan: do not skip CMA while LRU is full of CMA
 folios
Message-ID: <ZhOtCtGBSCntUHvR@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20240408080539.14282-1-liuhailong@oppo.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240408080539.14282-1-liuhailong@oppo.com>

On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 04:05:39PM +0800, liuhailong@oppo.com wrote:
> From: liuhailong <liuhailong@oppo.com>
> @@ -6202,6 +6213,16 @@ static unsigned long do_try_to_free_pages(struct zonelist *zonelist,
>  		 */
>  		if (sc->priority < DEF_PRIORITY - 2)
>  			sc->may_writepage = 1;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * If we're getting trouble reclaiming non-cma pages and
> +		 * currently a substantial number of CMA pages on LRU,
"sit on LRU" ?

> +		 * start reclaiming cma pages to alleviate other threads
> +		 * and decrease lru size.
> +		 */
> +		if (sc->priority < DEF_PRIORITY - 2 &&
> +		    sc->nr_scanned < (sc->nr_skipped_cma >> 3))

Why "sc->nr_skipped_cma >> 3"? It feels a bit hardcoded.
Maybe the comment or the changelog should contain a reference about why
this "/8" was a good choice.


-- 
Oscar Salvador
SUSE Labs