From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>,
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>, 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: Mon, 2 May 2011 09:22:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110502072210.GA24305@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinkB+qF6u6TtsSoahdPOmNtAht39A@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 10:44:16AM -0700, Ying Han wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 6:05 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz> wrote:
> > 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.
The changelog is a bit misleading: you don't just add something that
counts something. You add code that can result in actual page
reclamation.
> >> @@ -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?
>
> We decided to leave the shrink_zone for now before making further
> changes for soft_limit reclaim. The same
> patch I did last time for global background reclaim. It is safer to do
> this step-by-step :)
I am sorry, but I kinda lost track of what's going on because there
are so many patches and concurrent discussions... who is we and do
you have a pointer to the email where this conclusion was reached?
And safe how? Do you want to trade a potential regression against a
certain one (overreclaim)?
--
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:[~2011-05-02 7:22 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
2011-04-29 17:44 ` Ying Han
2011-05-02 7:22 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
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=20110502072210.GA24305@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--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=mhocko@suse.cz \
--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