From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Zhu Yanhai <zhu.yanhai@gmail.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Add the soft_limit reclaim in global direct reclaim.
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 15:05:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110429130503.GA306@tiehlicka.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1304030226-19332-2-git-send-email-yinghan@google.com>
On Thu 28-04-11 15:37:05, Ying Han wrote:
> We recently added the change in global background reclaim which
> counts the return value of soft_limit reclaim. Now this patch adds
> the similar logic on global direct reclaim.
>
> We should skip scanning global LRU on shrink_zone if soft_limit reclaim
> does enough work. This is the first step where we start with counting
> the nr_scanned and nr_reclaimed from soft_limit reclaim into global
> scan_control.
Makes sense.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index b3a569f..84003cc 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -1959,11 +1959,14 @@ restart:
> * If a zone is deemed to be full of pinned pages then just give it a light
> * scan then give up on it.
> */
> -static void shrink_zones(int priority, struct zonelist *zonelist,
> +static unsigned long shrink_zones(int priority, struct zonelist *zonelist,
> struct scan_control *sc)
> {
> struct zoneref *z;
> struct zone *zone;
> + unsigned long nr_soft_reclaimed;
> + unsigned long nr_soft_scanned;
> + unsigned long total_scanned = 0;
>
> for_each_zone_zonelist_nodemask(zone, z, zonelist,
> gfp_zone(sc->gfp_mask), sc->nodemask) {
> @@ -1980,8 +1983,17 @@ static void shrink_zones(int priority, struct zonelist *zonelist,
> continue; /* Let kswapd poll it */
> }
>
> + nr_soft_scanned = 0;
> + nr_soft_reclaimed = mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim(zone,
> + sc->order, sc->gfp_mask,
> + &nr_soft_scanned);
> + sc->nr_reclaimed += nr_soft_reclaimed;
> + total_scanned += nr_soft_scanned;
> +
> shrink_zone(priority, zone, sc);
This can cause more aggressive reclaiming, right? Shouldn't we check
whether shrink_zone is still needed?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX s.r.o.
Lihovarska 1060/12
190 00 Praha 9
Czech Republic
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-29 13:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-28 22:37 [PATCH 0/2] memcg: add " Ying Han
2011-04-28 22:37 ` [PATCH 1/2] Add " Ying Han
2011-04-28 23:25 ` Ying Han
2011-04-29 10:26 ` Balbir Singh
2011-04-29 17:42 ` Ying Han
2011-04-29 13:05 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2011-04-29 17:44 ` Ying Han
2011-05-02 7:22 ` Johannes Weiner
2011-04-28 22:37 ` [PATCH 2/2] Add stats to monitor soft_limit reclaim Ying Han
2011-04-28 23:26 ` Ying Han
2011-04-28 23:51 ` Hiroyuki Kamezawa
2011-04-29 3:28 ` Ying Han
2011-04-29 10:30 ` Balbir Singh
2011-04-29 19:12 ` Ying Han
2011-04-28 23:24 ` [PATCH 0/2] memcg: add the soft_limit reclaim in global direct reclaim Ying Han
2011-04-29 10:23 ` Balbir Singh
2011-04-29 17:17 ` Ying Han
2011-04-29 16:44 ` Minchan Kim
2011-04-29 17:19 ` Ying Han
2011-04-29 17:48 ` Ying Han
2011-04-29 18:58 ` Ying Han
2011-04-29 23:20 ` Minchan Kim
2011-04-29 23:41 ` Ying Han
2011-04-30 1:33 ` Ying Han
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=20110429130503.GA306@tiehlicka.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=xemul@openvz.org \
--cc=yinghan@google.com \
--cc=zhu.yanhai@gmail.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