diff mbox series

[162/200] mm/oom_kill: change comment and rename is_dump_unreclaim_slabs()

Message ID 20201215031249.xd7Y7EU-N%akpm@linux-foundation.org (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show
Series [001/200] kthread: add kthread_work tracepoints | expand

Commit Message

Andrew Morton Dec. 15, 2020, 3:12 a.m. UTC
From: Hui Su <sh_def@163.com>
Subject: mm/oom_kill: change comment and rename is_dump_unreclaim_slabs()

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.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201030182704.GA53949@rlk
Signed-off-by: Hui Su <sh_def@163.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---

 mm/oom_kill.c |   14 ++++++++------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff mbox series

Patch

--- a/mm/oom_kill.c~mm-oom_kill-change-comment-and-rename-is_dump_unreclaim_slabs
+++ a/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -170,11 +170,13 @@  static bool oom_unkillable_task(struct t
 	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_contr
 		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)