From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cleanup and kernelify shrinker registration (rc5-mm2) From: Rusty Russell In-Reply-To: <20070402205825.12190e52.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <1175571885.12230.473.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070402205825.12190e52.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2007 14:45:02 +1000 Message-Id: <1175575503.12230.484.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: lkml - Kernel Mailing List , linux-mm@kvack.org, xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com, reiserfs-dev@namesys.com List-ID: On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 20:58 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 03 Apr 2007 13:44:45 +1000 Rusty Russell wrote: > > > > > I can never remember what the function to register to receive VM pressure > > is called. I have to trace down from __alloc_pages() to find it. > > > > It's called "set_shrinker()", and it needs Your Help. > > > > New version: > > 1) Don't hide struct shrinker. It contains no magic. > > 2) Don't allocate "struct shrinker". It's not helpful. > > 3) Call them "register_shrinker" and "unregister_shrinker". > > 4) Call the function "shrink" not "shrinker". > > 5) Rename "nr_to_scan" argument to "nr_to_free". > > No, it is actually the number to scan. This is >= the number of freed > objects. > > This is because, for better of for worse, the VM tries to balance the > scanning rate of the various caches, not the reclaiming rate. Err, ok, I completely missed that distinction. Does that mean the to function correctly every user needs some internal cursor so it doesn't end up scanning the first N entries over and over? Rusty. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org