From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62EAD9000C1 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 23:16:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (unknown [10.0.50.71]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C63123EE0C7 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:16:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from smail (m1 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACE2D45DE5A for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:16:08 +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 947EB45DE55 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:16:08 +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 873EA1DB8042 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:16:08 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.240.81.134]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5352D1DB8044 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:16:08 +0900 (JST) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:09:31 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fix get_scan_count for working well with small targets Message-Id: <20110427120931.a993890f.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20110427105031.db203b95.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20110426181724.f8cdad57.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110426135934.c1992c3e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20110427105031.db203b95.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: Andrew Morton , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" , "kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com" , "minchan.kim@gmail.com" , "mgorman@suse.de" , Ying Han On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:50:31 +0900 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 13:59:34 -0700 > Andrew Morton wrote: > > > What about simply removing the nr_saved_scan logic and permitting small > > scans? That simplifies the code and I bet it makes no measurable > > performance difference. > > > > ok, v2 here. How this looks ? > For memcg, I think I should add select_victim_node() for direct reclaim, > then, we'll be tune big memcg using small memory on a zone case. > Ah, sorry this v2 doesn't remove nr_saved_scan in reclaim_stat. ... I will send v3. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org