Re: [PATCH] mm/vmscan: fix comment logic in balance_pgdat

[Johannes Weiner]

On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 08:51:07AM +0800, Enlin Mu wrote:
> In balance_pgdat(), when the low watermark is met, processes sleeping on
> pfmemalloc_wait are woken up because they are able to safely make forward
> progress.
> 
> However, the comment incorrectly states "they should not be able",
> which contradicts the actual code behavior. Fix this typo to accurately
> reflect the logic.
> 
> No functional changes are introduced.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Enlin Mu <enlin.mu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Enlin Mu <enlin.mu@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  mm/vmscan.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 35c3bb15ae96..822f73758c42 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -7188,7 +7188,7 @@ static int balance_pgdat(pg_data_t *pgdat, int order, int highest_zoneidx)
>  
>  		/*
>  		 * If the low watermark is met there is no need for processes
> -		 * to be throttled on pfmemalloc_wait as they should not be
> +		 * to be throttled on pfmemalloc_wait as they should be

Pretty sure this was supposed to be "now" instead of "not". That would
make more sense than removing it, since this is about the watermark
check after kswapd has performed reclaim.

>  		 * able to safely make forward progress. Wake them
>  		 */
>  		if (waitqueue_active(&pgdat->pfmemalloc_wait) &&