Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mm: compaction: support triggering of proactive compaction by user
From: Vlastimil Babka <hidden>
Date: 2021-06-17 16:18:05
Also in:
linux-doc, linux-fsdevel, lkml
From: Vlastimil Babka <hidden>
Date: 2021-06-17 16:18:05
Also in:
linux-doc, linux-fsdevel, lkml
On 6/17/21 6:05 PM, Charan Teja Kalla wrote:
The wait_event/freezable_timeout() documentation says that:
* Returns:
* 0 if the @condition evaluated to %false after the @timeout elapsed,
or
* 1 if the @condition evaluated to %true after the @timeout elapsed,
* or the remaining jiffies (at least 1) if the @condition evaluated
* to %true before the @timeout elapsed.
which means the condition must be evaluated to true or timeout should be
elapsed for the function wait_event_freezable_timeout() to return.
Please check the macro implementation of __wait_event, where it will be
in for(;;) till the condition is evaluated to true or timeout happens.
#define __wait_event_freezable_timeout(wq_head, condition, timeout)
___wait_event(wq_head, ___wait_cond_timeout(condition),
TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, 0, timeout,
__ret = freezable_schedule_timeout(__ret))
Thus the plain wakeup of kcompactd don't do the proactive compact work.
And so we should identify its wakeup for proactive work with a separate
flag.OK, you're right, I forgot that the macro has the for loop to guard against spurious wakeups.