From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CD22A6B0062 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 02:37:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from m2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.72]) by fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id n0F7b5al029379 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:37:05 +0900 Received: from smail (m2 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC7EA45DE61 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:37:04 +0900 (JST) Received: from s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.92]) by m2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97D9F45DE5D for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:37:04 +0900 (JST) Received: from s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6404EE38002 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:37:04 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.103]) by s2.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAF26E18009 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:37:03 +0900 (JST) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:35:59 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] memcg: fix infinite loop Message-Id: <20090115163559.ea5715c4.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <496EE683.8090101@cn.fujitsu.com> References: <496ED2B7.5050902@cn.fujitsu.com> <20090115061557.GD30358@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20090115153134.632ebc85.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <496EE25E.3030703@cn.fujitsu.com> <20090115162126.cf040c63.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <496EE683.8090101@cn.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Li Zefan Cc: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Daisuke Nishimura , "linux-mm@kvack.org" List-ID: On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:32:19 +0800 Li Zefan wrote: > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > try_to_free_page() returns positive value if try_to_free_page() reclaims at > > least 1 pages. It itself doesn't seem to be buggy. > > > > What buggy is resize_limit's retry-out check code, I think. > > > > How about following ? > > Not sure. > > I didn't look into the reclaim code, so I'd rather let you and Balbir decide if > this is a bug and (if yes) how to fix it. > Hmm, I personally think this is not a bug. But *UNEXPECTED* behavior change, yes, it's called regression. To be honest, I never like retry-by-count because there is no trustable logic. Thank you for reporting anyway. I'll consider some workaround. -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