From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx200.postini.com [74.125.245.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8BC9F6B002B for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 14:34:22 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 14:33:32 -0500 From: Johannes Weiner Subject: Re: [patch 3/8] mm: vmscan: save work scanning (almost) empty LRU lists Message-ID: <20121213193332.GB6317@cmpxchg.org> References: <1355348620-9382-1-git-send-email-hannes@cmpxchg.org> <1355348620-9382-4-git-send-email-hannes@cmpxchg.org> <20121213104104.GX1009@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121213104104.GX1009@suse.de> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Mel Gorman Cc: Andrew Morton , Rik van Riel , Michal Hocko , Hugh Dickins , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:41:04AM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 04:43:35PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > In certain cases (kswapd reclaim, memcg target reclaim), a fixed > > minimum amount of pages is scanned from the LRU lists on each > > iteration, to make progress. > > > > Do not make this minimum bigger than the respective LRU list size, > > however, and save some busy work trying to isolate and reclaim pages > > that are not there. > > > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner > > This looks like a corner case where the LRU size would have to be smaller > than SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX. Is that common enough to care? It looks correct, > I'm just curious. We have one lruvec per memcg per zone, so consider memory cgroups in a NUMA environment: NR_MEMCG * (NR_NODES - 1) * NR_LRU_LISTS permanently empty lruvecs, assuming the memory of one cgroup is bound to one node. -- 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