linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] memcg: integrate soft reclaim tighter with zone shrinking code
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 15:31:42 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130409133142.GH29860@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130409130833.GP1953@cmpxchg.org>

On Tue 09-04-13 09:08:33, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 02:13:13PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > TODO: remove mem_cgroup_tree_per_zone, mem_cgroup_shrink_node_zone and co.
> > but maybe it would be easier for review to remove that code in a separate
> > patch...
> 
> It should be in this series, though, for the diffstat :-)

Sure thing, I just wanted to prevent from pointless work during rebasing
when this changes its shape, like all such "bug changes"

> 
> > ---
> > [1] TODO: put size vmlinux before/after whole clean-up
> 
> Yes!
> 
> > @@ -1984,6 +2003,27 @@ static void shrink_zone(struct zone *zone, struct scan_control *sc)
> >  		} while (memcg);
> >  	} while (should_continue_reclaim(zone, sc->nr_reclaimed - nr_reclaimed,
> >  					 sc->nr_scanned - nr_scanned, sc));
> > +
> > +	return nr_shrunk;
> > +}
> > +
> > +
> > +static void shrink_zone(struct zone *zone, struct scan_control *sc)
> > +{
> > +	bool do_soft_reclaim = mem_cgroup_should_soft_reclaim(sc);
> > +	unsigned long nr_scanned = sc->nr_scanned;
> > +	unsigned nr_shrunk;
> > +
> > +	nr_shrunk = __shrink_zone(zone, sc, do_soft_reclaim);
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * No group is over the soft limit or those that are do not have
> > +	 * pages in the zone we are reclaiming so we have to reclaim everybody
> > +	 */
> > +	if (do_soft_reclaim && (!nr_shrunk || sc->nr_scanned == nr_scanned)) {
> 
> If no pages were scanned you are doing a second pass regardless of
> nr_shrunk.  If pages were scanned, nr_shrunk must have been increased
> as well.  So I think you can remove all the nr_shrunk counting and
> just check for scanned pages, no?

Yes you are right. I have started with nr_shrunk part only and then
realized that no scaning could be a problem so I've just added it. I
didn't optimize it yet.
I will remove nr_shrunk part in later versions.

Thanks
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2013-04-09 13:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-09 12:13 [RFC 0/3] soft reclaim rework Michal Hocko
2013-04-09 12:13 ` [RFC 1/3] memcg: integrate soft reclaim tighter with zone shrinking code Michal Hocko
2013-04-09 13:08   ` Johannes Weiner
2013-04-09 13:31     ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2013-04-09 13:57   ` Glauber Costa
2013-04-09 14:22     ` Michal Hocko
2013-04-09 16:45   ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2013-04-09 17:05     ` Michal Hocko
2013-04-14  0:42   ` Mel Gorman
2013-04-14 14:34     ` Michal Hocko
2013-04-14 14:55       ` Johannes Weiner
2013-04-14 15:04         ` Michal Hocko
2013-04-14 15:11           ` Michal Hocko
2013-04-14 18:03           ` Rik van Riel
2013-04-09 12:13 ` [RFC 2/3] memcg: Ignore soft limit until it is explicitly specified Michal Hocko
2013-04-09 13:24   ` Johannes Weiner
2013-04-09 13:42     ` Michal Hocko
2013-04-09 17:10   ` Kamezawa Hiroyuki
2013-04-09 17:22     ` Michal Hocko
2013-04-09 12:13 ` [RFC 3/3] vmscan, memcg: Do softlimit reclaim also for targeted reclaim Michal Hocko
2013-04-22  2:14   ` Michal Hocko
2013-04-09 15:37 ` [RFC 0/3] soft reclaim rework Michal Hocko
2013-04-09 15:50   ` Michal Hocko
2013-04-11  8:43 ` Michal Hocko
2013-04-11  9:07   ` Michal Hocko
2013-04-11 13:04   ` Michal Hocko
2013-04-17 22:52 ` 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=20130409133142.GH29860@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@suse.cz \
    --cc=glommer@parallels.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=yinghan@google.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