call vm_lowmem hook in uma_reclaim_worker
ClosedPublic
Actions

Authored by avg on Feb 23 2017, 12:05 PM.

Details

Reviewers

kib
markj

Commits

rS314272: call vm_lowmem hook in uma_reclaim_worker

Summary

A comment near kmem_reclaim() implies that we already did that.
Calling the hook is useful, because some handlers, e.g. ARC,
might be able to release significant amounts of KVA.

Now that we have more than one place where vm_lowmem hook is called,
use this change as an opportunity to introduce flags that describe
a reason for calling the hook. No handler makes use of the flags yet.

Diff Detail

Repository

rS FreeBSD src repository - subversion

Lint

Lint Not Applicable

Unit

Tests Not Applicable

Event Timeline

avg updated this revision to Diff 25616.Feb 23 2017, 12:05 PM

avg retitled this revision from to call vm_lowmem hook in uma_reclaim_worker.

avg updated this object.

avg edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)

avg added reviewers: kib, markj.

Herald added a subscriber: imp. · View Herald TranscriptFeb 23 2017, 12:05 PM

kib added inline comments.Feb 23 2017, 12:39 PM

sys/vm/uma_core.c
3205 ↗	(On Diff #25616)	I suggest that some more care is needed there. In particular, I would only clear uma_reclaim_needed after re-acquiring uma_drain_lock.
sys/vm/vm_kern.c
557 ↗	(On Diff #25616)	if (i != 0)

markj added inline comments.Feb 23 2017, 5:42 PM

sys/vm/vm_pageout.h
92 ↗	(On Diff #25616)	If these can be ORed together as suggested by the check in debug_vm_lowmem(), it'd be clearer to use hex constants.

avg added inline comments.Feb 23 2017, 10:25 PM

sys/vm/uma_core.c
3205 ↗	(On Diff #25616)	I am not sure if that would actually make any difference, because that flag is already sloppy in a sense that it's set without holding the lock.
sys/vm/vm_kern.c
557 ↗	(On Diff #25616)	Okay.
sys/vm/vm_pageout.h
92 ↗	(On Diff #25616)	Sure. Will do.