From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDDC1C433B4 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 20:38:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AEA361409 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 20:38:45 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2AEA361409 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 98C6F8E0002; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:38:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 93C458E0001; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:38:44 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 7DC598E0002; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:38:44 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0158.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.158]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DC8A8E0001 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:38:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin33.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AB388248047 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 20:38:44 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78061166568.33.E4FE5F0 Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by imf27.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B48680192EB for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 20:38:24 +0000 (UTC) IronPort-SDR: g2Sb75OK+YobHkIxjlMmsE74OZMzmsWXG8GLLZqpGnchrR5qK6F10X3zR2Og0QVGq1RACbp+Ov HHZhkAj5gZIQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,9962"; a="195526123" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.82,243,1613462400"; d="scan'208";a="195526123" Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Apr 2021 13:38:40 -0700 IronPort-SDR: Isf7drjwXoRts/RJMskUjhCmW/kIFvXPPhbbUOynSgNam43cx/J09Bo2tu/28VKcm4WJXgykZ1 q1lfJTtGTQZA== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.82,243,1613462400"; d="scan'208";a="421515120" Received: from schen9-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.254.72.4]) by fmsmga008-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Apr 2021 13:38:39 -0700 Subject: Re: [RFC] mm/vmscan.c: avoid possible long latency caused by too_many_isolated() To: Yu Zhao Cc: Xing Zhengjun , Andrew Morton , Linux-MM , linux-kernel , Huang Ying , Shakeel Butt , Michal Hocko , wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn References: <20210416023536.168632-1-zhengjun.xing@linux.intel.com> <7b7a1c09-3d16-e199-15d2-ccea906d4a66@linux.intel.com> From: Tim Chen Message-ID: <2ea3318a-b17c-ec4c-5425-cb93e079a994@linux.intel.com> Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 13:38:39 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 1B48680192EB X-Stat-Signature: 1o589f7931mu3risdiumt95x3y8p6z4r X-Rspamd-Server: rspam02 Received-SPF: none (linux.intel.com>: No applicable sender policy available) receiver=imf27; identity=mailfrom; envelope-from=""; helo=mga14.intel.com; client-ip=192.55.52.115 X-HE-DKIM-Result: none/none X-HE-Tag: 1619123904-33120 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 4/22/21 1:30 PM, Yu Zhao wrote: > > HZ/10 is purely arbitrary but that's ok because we assume normally > nobody hits it. If you do often, we need to figure out why and how not > to hit it so often. > Perhaps Zhengjun can test the proposed fix in his test case to see if the timeout value makes any difference. Tim