From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ying Han <yinghan@google.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [patch -v4 4/8] memcg: enhance memcg iterator to support predicates
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 09:37:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130605073728.GC15997@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130604205426.GI14916@htj.dyndns.org>
On Tue 04-06-13 13:54:26, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 10:48:07PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > I really don't think memcg can afford to add more mess than there
> > > already is. Let's try to get things right with each change, please.
> >
> > Is this really about inside vs. outside skipping? I think this is a
> > general improvement to the code. I really prefer not duplicating common
> > code and skipping handling is such a code (we have a visitor which can
> > control the walk). With a side bonus that it doesn't have to pollute
> > vmscan more than necessary.
> >
> > Please be more specific about _what_ is so ugly about this interface so
> > that it matters so much.
>
> Can you please try the other approach and see how it looks?
Tejun, I do not have infinite amount of time and this is barely a
priority for the patchset. The core part is to be able to skip
nodes/subtrees which are not worth reclaiming, remember?
I have already expressed my priorities for inside skipping
decisions. You are just throwing "let's try a different way" handwavy
suggestions. I have no problem to pull the skip logic outside of
iterators if more people think that this is _really_ important. But
until then I take it as a really low priority that shouldn't delay the
patchset without a good reason.
So please try to focus on the technical parts of the patchset if you
want to help with the review. I really appreciate suggestions but please
do not get down to bike scheding.
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-05 7:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-03 10:18 [patch v4] Soft limit rework Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 1/8] memcg: integrate soft reclaim tighter with zone shrinking code Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 2/8] memcg: Get rid of soft-limit tree infrastructure Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 3/8] vmscan, memcg: Do softlimit reclaim also for targeted reclaim Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 4/8] memcg: enhance memcg iterator to support predicates Michal Hocko
2013-06-04 1:07 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-04 13:45 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-04 19:36 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-04 20:48 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-04 20:54 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-05 7:37 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2013-06-05 8:05 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-05 8:52 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-05 8:58 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-05 9:07 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-05 9:09 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-07 0:48 ` Tejun Heo
2013-06-07 8:25 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-10 7:48 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 5/8] memcg: track children in soft limit excess to improve soft limit Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 6/8] memcg, vmscan: Do not attempt soft limit reclaim if it would not scan anything Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 7/8] memcg: Track all children over limit in the root Michal Hocko
2013-06-03 10:18 ` [patch -v4 8/8] memcg, vmscan: do not fall into reclaim-all pass too quickly Michal Hocko
2013-06-04 16:27 ` [patch v4] Soft limit rework Balbir Singh
2013-06-04 16:38 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-04 17:57 ` Balbir Singh
2013-06-04 18:08 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-11 15:43 ` Michal Hocko
2013-06-17 14:01 ` Michal Hocko
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=20130605073728.GC15997@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=glommer@parallels.com \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=walken@google.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