From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] vmscan: bail out of page reclaim after swap_cluster_max pages
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 19:22:06 +0900 (JST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081122191258.26B0.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081115235410.2d2c76de.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Hi
I digged many git-log today.
> > > > Of course, one thing we could do is exempt kswapd from this check.
> > > > During light reclaim, kswapd does most of the eviction so scanning
> > > > should remain balanced. Having one process fall down to a lower
> > > > priority level is also not a big problem.
> > > >
> > > > As long as the direct reclaim processes do not also fall into the
> > > > same trap, the situation should be manageable.
> > > >
> > > > Does that sound reasonable to you?
> > >
> > > I'll need to find some time to go dig through the changelogs.
> >
> > as far as I tried, git database doesn't have that changelogs.
> > FWIW, I guess it is more old.
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/old-2.6-bkcvs.git
> goes back to 2.5.20 (iirc).
sorry, I was wrong.
following patch revertion was happend at 2006.
And, thank you andrew.
your comment is very nice.
So, desiable behavior is
direct reclaim:
should be bailed out if enough page reclaimed
kswapd:
don't bailed.
Actually, my prepared another bailed out patch has sc->may_cut_off member.
shrink_zone can do shorcut exiting if only sc->may_cut_off==1.
Rik, sorry, I nak current your patch.
because it don't fix old akpm issue.
Very sorry.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 08:11:14 +0000 (-0800)
Subject: [PATCH] vmscan: balancing fix
X-Git-Tag: v2.6.16-rc1~936^2~246
Revert a patch which went into 2.6.8-rc1. The changelog for that patch was:
The shrink_zone() logic can, under some circumstances, cause far too many
pages to be reclaimed. Say, we're scanning at high priority and suddenly
hit a large number of reclaimable pages on the LRU.
Change things so we bale out when SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX pages have been
reclaimed.
Problem is, this change caused significant imbalance in inter-zone scan
balancing by truncating scans of larger zones.
Suppose, for example, ZONE_HIGHMEM is 10x the size of ZONE_NORMAL. The zone
balancing algorithm would require that if we're scanning 100 pages of
ZONE_HIGHMEM, we should scan 10 pages of ZONE_NORMAL. But this logic will
cause the scanning of ZONE_HIGHMEM to bale out after only 32 pages are
reclaimed. Thus effectively causing smaller zones to be scanned relatively
harder than large ones.
Now I need to remember what the workload was which caused me to write this
patch originally, then fix it up in a different way...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-22 10:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-13 22:12 Rik van Riel
2008-11-14 0:51 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-14 3:27 ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-14 14:36 ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-14 17:18 ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-16 7:43 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-16 7:54 ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-16 7:56 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-16 8:02 ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-22 10:22 ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2008-11-22 16:57 ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-24 19:12 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-24 19:18 ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-16 7:38 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-17 0:38 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-17 3:43 ` Balbir Singh
2008-11-19 16:54 ` Mel Gorman
2008-11-21 11:59 ` Petr Tesarik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20081122191258.26B0.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox