From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 17:17:08 +0900 From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [RFC 5/5] Memory controller soft limit reclaim on contention In-Reply-To: <48689527.7070403@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20080630165125.37E6.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> <48689527.7070403@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Message-Id: <20080630171608.37E9.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.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: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Andrew Morton , YAMAMOTO Takashi , Paul Menage , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki List-ID: > > yes, memcg used only one page. > > but mem_cgroup_reclaim_on_contention() reclaim for generic alloc_pages(), instead for memcg. > > we can't assume memcg usage. > > isn't it? > > Yes, but the reclaim is from memcg pages (memcg groups that are over their soft > limit). I am not sure if I understand your point? If your claim is that we don't > free up pages of at-least order (as desired by __alloc_pages_internal()), that > is correct. We can ensure that we do a pass over memcg and generic zone LRU. exactly. Thank you. -- 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