From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail138.messagelabs.com (mail138.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1520A6B003D for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 05:54:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.71]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id n319tlPa005860 for (envelope-from kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com); Wed, 1 Apr 2009 18:55:47 +0900 Received: from smail (m1 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C67645DD75 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 18:55:47 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.91]) by m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AC8745DD72 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 18:55:47 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13E131DB8016 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 18:55:47 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml13.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.103]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C56811DB8013 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2009 18:55:46 +0900 (JST) From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmscan: memcg needs may_swap (Re: [patch] vmscan: rename sc.may_swap to may_unmap) In-Reply-To: <20090401094955.GA1656@cmpxchg.org> References: <20090401180445.80b11d90.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090401094955.GA1656@cmpxchg.org> Message-Id: <20090401185418.B204.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 18:55:45 +0900 (JST) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Johannes Weiner Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Minchan Kim , Daisuke Nishimura , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Rik van Riel , Balbir Singh List-ID: > > > How about making may_swap mean the following: > > > > > > @@ -642,6 +639,8 @@ static unsigned long shrink_page_list(st > > > * Try to allocate it some swap space here. > > > */ > > > if (PageAnon(page) && !PageSwapCache(page)) { > > > + if (!sc->map_swap) > > > + goto keep_locked; > > > if (!(sc->gfp_mask & __GFP_IO)) > > > goto keep_locked; > > > if (!add_to_swap(page)) > > > > > > try_to_free_pages() always sets it. > > > > > What is the advantage than _not_ scanning ANON LRU at all ? > > I thought we could collect anon pages that don't need swap io. Yes. but Is this important? if memcg reclaim don't collect sleal swapcache, other global reclaim can. Am I missing any viewpoint? -- 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