From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail138.messagelabs.com (mail138.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 836FF6B0012 for ; Thu, 19 May 2011 23:00:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (unknown [10.0.50.74]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F2953EE0C2 for ; Fri, 20 May 2011 12:00:14 +0900 (JST) Received: from smail (m4 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0268E45DE50 for ; Fri, 20 May 2011 12:00:14 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.94]) by m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id E212A45DE4E for ; Fri, 20 May 2011 12:00:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB4631DB802F for ; Fri, 20 May 2011 12:00:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.240.81.134]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D7071DB8037 for ; Fri, 20 May 2011 12:00:13 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <4DD5D92B.8030209@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 11:59:55 +0900 From: KOSAKI Motohiro MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] change shrinker API by passing shrink_control struct Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: linux-mm@kvack.org, yinghan@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com > Hmm, got Nick's email wrong. > > --Ying Ping. Can you please explain current status? When I can see your answer? > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Ying Han wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 5:47 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro >> wrote: >>>> > > { >>>> > >    struct xfs_mount *mp; >>>> > >    struct xfs_perag *pag; >>>> > >    xfs_agnumber_t ag; >>>> > >    int       reclaimable; >>>> > > +   int nr_to_scan = sc->nr_slab_to_reclaim; >>>> > > +   gfp_t gfp_mask = sc->gfp_mask; >>>> > >>>> > And, this very near meaning field .nr_scanned and .nr_slab_to_reclaim >>>> > poped up new question. >>>> > Why don't we pass more clever slab shrinker target? Why do we need pass >>>> > similar two argument? >>>> > >>>> >>>> I renamed the nr_slab_to_reclaim and nr_scanned in shrink struct. >>> >>> Oh no. that's not naming issue. example, Nick's previous similar patch pass >>> zone-total-pages and how-much-scanned-pages. (ie shrink_slab don't calculate >>> current magical target scanning objects anymore) >>>    ie, "4 * max_pass * (scanned / nr- lru_pages-in-zones)" >>> >>> Instead, individual shrink_slab callback calculate this one. >>> see git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/npiggin/linux-npiggin.git >>> >>> I'm curious why you change the design from another guy's previous very similar effort and >>> We have to be convinced which is better. >> >> Thank you for the pointer. My patch is intended to consolidate all >> existing parameters passed from reclaim code >> to the shrinker. >> >> Talked w/ Nick and Andrew from last LSF, we agree that this patch >> will be useful for other extensions later which allows us easily >> adding extensions to the shrinkers without shrinker files. Nick and I >> talked about the effort later to pass the nodemask down to the >> shrinker. He is cc-ed in the thread. Another thing I would like to >> repost is to add the reclaim priority down to the shrinker, which we >> won't throw tons of page caches pages by reclaiming one inode slab >> object. >> >> --Ying -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org