search for: da1b13ccfbebe

...: ... > >>> > >>> Also (but not your fault) the put_page() preceding > >>> test_set_page_hwpoison(page)) IMHO deserves a comment saying which > >>> pin we are releasing and which one we still have (hopefully? if I > >>> read description of da1b13ccfbebe right) otherwise it looks like > >>> doing something with a page that we just potentially freed. > >> > >> Yes, while I read the code, I had same question. I think the releasing > >> refcount is for get_any_page. > > > > As the other callers of pa...

...: ... > >>> > >>> Also (but not your fault) the put_page() preceding > >>> test_set_page_hwpoison(page)) IMHO deserves a comment saying which > >>> pin we are releasing and which one we still have (hopefully? if I > >>> read description of da1b13ccfbebe right) otherwise it looks like > >>> doing something with a page that we just potentially freed. > >> > >> Yes, while I read the code, I had same question. I think the releasing > >> refcount is for get_any_page. > > > > As the other callers of pa...

...catching and > kill the poor proces. > > > > > Also (but not your fault) the put_page() preceding > > test_set_page_hwpoison(page)) IMHO deserves a comment saying which > > pin we are releasing and which one we still have (hopefully? if I > > read description of da1b13ccfbebe right) otherwise it looks like > > doing something with a page that we just potentially freed. > > Yes, while I read the code, I had same question. I think the releasing > refcount is for get_any_page. As the other callers of page migration do, soft_offline_page expects the migratio...

...catching and > kill the poor proces. > > > > > Also (but not your fault) the put_page() preceding > > test_set_page_hwpoison(page)) IMHO deserves a comment saying which > > pin we are releasing and which one we still have (hopefully? if I > > read description of da1b13ccfbebe right) otherwise it looks like > > doing something with a page that we just potentially freed. > > Yes, while I read the code, I had same question. I think the releasing > refcount is for get_any_page. As the other callers of page migration do, soft_offline_page expects the migratio...

...gt;>> >>>>> Also (but not your fault) the put_page() preceding >>>>> test_set_page_hwpoison(page)) IMHO deserves a comment saying which >>>>> pin we are releasing and which one we still have (hopefully? if I >>>>> read description of da1b13ccfbebe right) otherwise it looks like >>>>> doing something with a page that we just potentially freed. >>>> >>>> Yes, while I read the code, I had same question. I think the releasing >>>> refcount is for get_any_page. >>> >>> As the ot...

...;>>>> Also (but not your fault) the put_page() preceding > >>>>> test_set_page_hwpoison(page)) IMHO deserves a comment saying which > >>>>> pin we are releasing and which one we still have (hopefully? if I > >>>>> read description of da1b13ccfbebe right) otherwise it looks like > >>>>> doing something with a page that we just potentially freed. > >>>> > >>>> Yes, while I read the code, I had same question. I think the releasing > >>>> refcount is for get_any_page. > >>&g...

...;>>>> Also (but not your fault) the put_page() preceding > >>>>> test_set_page_hwpoison(page)) IMHO deserves a comment saying which > >>>>> pin we are releasing and which one we still have (hopefully? if I > >>>>> read description of da1b13ccfbebe right) otherwise it looks like > >>>>> doing something with a page that we just potentially freed. > >>>> > >>>> Yes, while I read the code, I had same question. I think the releasing > >>>> refcount is for get_any_page. > >>&g...

...ion of hwpoison, which is IIRC to catch and kill the poor process that still uses the page? Also (but not your fault) the put_page() preceding test_set_page_hwpoison(page)) IMHO deserves a comment saying which pin we are releasing and which one we still have (hopefully? if I read description of da1b13ccfbebe right) otherwise it looks like doing something with a page that we just potentially freed. > + } else { > + if (rc != -EAGAIN) > putback_lru_page(page); > + if (put_new_page) > + put_new_page(newpage, private); > + else > + put_page(newpage); > } > > -...

...ion of hwpoison, which is IIRC to catch and kill the poor process that still uses the page? Also (but not your fault) the put_page() preceding test_set_page_hwpoison(page)) IMHO deserves a comment saying which pin we are releasing and which one we still have (hopefully? if I read description of da1b13ccfbebe right) otherwise it looks like doing something with a page that we just potentially freed. > + } else { > + if (rc != -EAGAIN) > putback_lru_page(page); > + if (put_new_page) > + put_new_page(newpage, private); > + else > + put_page(newpage); > } > > -...

...kill the poor proces. >> >>> >>> Also (but not your fault) the put_page() preceding >>> test_set_page_hwpoison(page)) IMHO deserves a comment saying which >>> pin we are releasing and which one we still have (hopefully? if I >>> read description of da1b13ccfbebe right) otherwise it looks like >>> doing something with a page that we just potentially freed. >> >> Yes, while I read the code, I had same question. I think the releasing >> refcount is for get_any_page. > > As the other callers of page migration do, soft_offline_...

...r proces. > > > > > > > > Also (but not your fault) the put_page() preceding > > > test_set_page_hwpoison(page)) IMHO deserves a comment saying which > > > pin we are releasing and which one we still have (hopefully? if I > > > read description of da1b13ccfbebe right) otherwise it looks like > > > doing something with a page that we just potentially freed. > > > > Yes, while I read the code, I had same question. I think the releasing > > refcount is for get_any_page. > > As the other callers of page migration do, soft_off...

...r proces. > > > > > > > > Also (but not your fault) the put_page() preceding > > > test_set_page_hwpoison(page)) IMHO deserves a comment saying which > > > pin we are releasing and which one we still have (hopefully? if I > > > read description of da1b13ccfbebe right) otherwise it looks like > > > doing something with a page that we just potentially freed. > > > > Yes, while I read the code, I had same question. I think the releasing > > refcount is for get_any_page. > > As the other callers of page migration do, soft_off...

...page so I think it's not for catching and kill the poor proces. > > Also (but not your fault) the put_page() preceding > test_set_page_hwpoison(page)) IMHO deserves a comment saying which > pin we are releasing and which one we still have (hopefully? if I > read description of da1b13ccfbebe right) otherwise it looks like > doing something with a page that we just potentially freed. Yes, while I read the code, I had same question. I think the releasing refcount is for get_any_page. Naoya, could you answer above two questions? Thanks. > > >+ } else { > >+ if (rc...

Recently, I got many reports about perfermance degradation in embedded system(Android mobile phone, webOS TV and so on) and failed to fork easily. The problem was fragmentation caused by zram and GPU driver pages. Their pages cannot be migrated so compaction cannot work well, either so reclaimer ends up shrinking all of working set pages. It made system very slow and even to fail to fork easily.

Recently, I got many reports about perfermance degradation in embedded system(Android mobile phone, webOS TV and so on) and failed to fork easily. The problem was fragmentation caused by zram and GPU driver pages. Their pages cannot be migrated so compaction cannot work well, either so reclaimer ends up shrinking all of working set pages. It made system very slow and even to fail to fork easily.