From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail6.bemta8.messagelabs.com (mail6.bemta8.messagelabs.com [216.82.243.55]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2556A900138 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 02:50:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (unknown [10.0.50.71]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A5433EE0BC for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 15:50:32 +0900 (JST) Received: from smail (m1 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F94D45DE54 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 15:50:32 +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 33ED845DE55 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 15:50:32 +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 2412D1DB8055 for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 15:50:32 +0900 (JST) Received: from m107.s.css.fujitsu.com (m107.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.240.81.147]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD4D41DB804B for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 15:50:31 +0900 (JST) Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 15:42:59 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/6] memcg: stop vmscan when enough done. Message-Id: <20110818154259.6b4adf09.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20110818062722.GB23056@tiehlicka.suse.cz> References: <20110809190450.16d7f845.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110809190933.d965888b.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110810141425.GC15007@tiehlicka.suse.cz> <20110811085252.b29081f1.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110811145055.GN8023@tiehlicka.suse.cz> <20110817095405.ee3dcd74.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110817113550.GA7482@tiehlicka.suse.cz> <20110818085233.69dbf23b.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110818062722.GB23056@tiehlicka.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "hannes@cmpxchg.org" , "nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp" On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 08:27:22 +0200 Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 18-08-11 08:52:33, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 13:35:50 +0200 > > Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > On Wed 17-08-11 09:54:05, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > > > On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:50:55 +0200 > > > > > - mem_cgroup_force_empty asks for reclaiming all pages. I guess it should be > > > > > OK but will have to think about it some more. > > > > > > > > force_empty/rmdir() is allowed to be stopped by Ctrl-C. I think passing res->usage > > > > is overkilling. > > > > > > So, how many pages should be reclaimed then? > > > > > > > How about (1 << (MAX_ORDER-1))/loop ? > > Hmm, I am not sure I see any benefit. We want to reclaim all those > pages why shouldn't we do it in one batch? If we use a value based on > MAX_ORDER then we make a bigger chance that force_empty fails for big > cgroups (e.g. with a lot of page cache). Why bigger chance to fail ? retry counter is decreased only when we cannot make any reclaim. The number passed here is not problem against the faiulre. I don't like very long vmscan which cannot be stopped by Ctrl-C. > Anyway, if we want to mimic the previous behavior then we should use > something like nr_nodes * SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX (the above value would be > sufficient for up to 32 nodes). > agreed. Thanks, -Kame -- 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