From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:47:56 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [rfc] [patch] mm: zone_reclaim fix for pseudo file systems Message-Id: <20070730214756.c4211678.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20070727232753.GA10311@localdomain> <20070730132314.f6c8b4e1.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070731000138.GA32468@localdomain> <20070730172007.ddf7bdee.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070731015647.GC32468@localdomain> <20070730192721.eb220a9d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Ravikiran G Thirumalai , linux-mm@kvack.org, shai@scalex86.org List-ID: On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:36:04 -0700 (PDT) Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Mon, 30 Jul 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > That makes sense, but any fix we do here won't fix things for regular > > reclaim. > > Standard reclaim has the same issues. It uselessly keeps > scanning the unreclaimable file backed pages. Well it shouldn't. That's what all_unreclaimable is for. And it does work. Or used to, five years ago. Stuff like this has a habit of breaking because we don't have a test suite. > Fixing this will also > enhance regular reclaim. > > > - account file-backed pages, BDI_CAP_NO_ACCT_DIRTY pages and > > BDI_CAP_NO_WRITEBACK separately. ie: zone accounting pretty > > much follows the BDI_CAP_ selectors. > > Or BDI_CAP_UNRECLAIMABLE.... Yeah, that's nice and direct. -- 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