From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Stalled MM patches for review
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 17:55:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141218165504.GB957@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141218022019.GA25071@phnom.home.cmpxchg.org>
On Wed 17-12-14 21:20:19, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 02:28:37PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
[...]
> > Why remove 'rebalance'? In the situation where direct reclaim does free
> > memory and we're waiting on writeback (no call to the oom killer is made),
> > it doesn't seem necessary to recalculate classzone_idx.
> >
> > Additionally, we never called wait_iff_congested() before when the oom
> > killer freed memory. This is a no-op if the preferred_zone isn't waiting
> > on writeback, but seems pointless if we just freed memory by calling the
> > oom killer.
>
> Why keep all these undocumented assumptions in the code? It's really
> simple: if we retry freeing memory (LRU reclaim or OOM kills), we wait
> for congestion, kick kswapd, re-evaluate the current task state,
> regardless of which reclaim method did what or anything at all. It's
> a slowpath, so there is no reason to not keep this simple and robust.
Agreed, the less subtle loops via labels we have the better.
--
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>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-18 16:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-15 23:02 Andrew Morton
2014-12-15 23:56 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2014-12-16 3:06 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-12-17 1:07 ` David Rientjes
2014-12-17 2:13 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-12-17 15:51 ` Michal Hocko
2014-12-17 22:28 ` David Rientjes
2014-12-18 2:20 ` Johannes Weiner
2014-12-18 16:55 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
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=20141218165504.GB957@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=rientjes@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