From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail202.messagelabs.com (mail202.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.227]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D1C556B0044 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:51:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.74]) by fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id nBENpCVu022982 for (envelope-from kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:51:12 +0900 Received: from smail (m4 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id AED582AEA81 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:51:12 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.94]) by m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F0281F7042 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:51:12 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 789D51DB803A for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:51:12 +0900 (JST) Received: from m106.s.css.fujitsu.com (m106.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.106]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 309241DB803E for ; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:51:12 +0900 (JST) From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] Stop reclaim quickly when the task reclaimed enough lots pages In-Reply-To: <4B264F77.6040603@redhat.com> References: <20091214213103.BBC0.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <4B264F77.6040603@redhat.com> Message-Id: <20091215084903.CDAA.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:51:11 +0900 (JST) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Rik van Riel Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, lwoodman@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, minchan.kim@gmail.com List-ID: > On 12/14/2009 07:31 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > > > From latency view, There isn't any reason shrink_zones() continue to > > reclaim another zone's page if the task reclaimed enough lots pages. > > IIRC there is one reason - keeping equal pageout pressure > between zones. > > However, it may be enough if just kswapd keeps evening out > the pressure, now that we limit the number of concurrent > direct reclaimers in the system. > > Since kswapd does not use shrink_zones ... Sure. That's exactly my point. plus, balance_pgdat() scan only one node. then zone balancing is meaingfull. but shrink_zones() scan all zone in all node. we don't need inter node balancing. it's vmscan's buisiness. > > Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro > > Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel Thanks. -- 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