From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:23:16 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [patch 05/19] split LRU lists into anon & file sets Message-Id: <20080110132316.4f604724.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20080110032631.GE15547@balbir.in.ibm.com> References: <20080108205939.323955454@redhat.com> <20080108210002.638347207@redhat.com> <20080109134132.ba7bb33c.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20080110022133.GC15547@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20080110113618.f967d215.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20080110032631.GE15547@balbir.in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: Rik van Riel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Lee Schermerhorn List-ID: On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 08:56:31 +0530 Balbir Singh wrote: > > > The control_type feature is gone. We still have cached page > > > accounting, but we do not allow control of only RSS pages anymore. We > > > need to control both RSS+cached pages. I do not understand your > > > question about new plan? Is it about adding back control_type? > > > > > Ah, just wanted to confirm that we can drop PAGE_CGROUP_FLAG_CACHE > > if page_file_cache() function and split-LRU is introduced. > > > > Earlier we would have had a problem, since we even accounted for swap > cache with PAGE_CGROUP_FLAG_CACHE and I think page_file_cache() does > not account swap cache pages with page_file_cache(). Our accounting > is based on mapped vs unmapped whereas the new code from Rik accounts > file vs anonymous. I suspect we could live a little while longer > with PAGE_CGROUP_FLAG_CACHE and then if we do not need it at all, > we can mark it down for removal. What do you think? Okay, I have no objection. Thanks, -Kame -- 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