From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg1-f198.google.com (mail-pg1-f198.google.com [209.85.215.198]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B71FD6B0008 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 07:23:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pg1-f198.google.com with SMTP id n4-v6so978849pgp.8 for ; Thu, 02 Aug 2018 04:23:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com. [192.55.52.88]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x37-v6si1502590pgl.544.2018.08.02.04.23.27 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 02 Aug 2018 04:23:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5B62EAAC.8000505@intel.com> Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 19:27:40 +0800 From: Wei Wang MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] virtio_balloon: replace oom notifier with shrinker References: <1532683495-31974-1-git-send-email-wei.w.wang@intel.com> <1532683495-31974-3-git-send-email-wei.w.wang@intel.com> <20180730090041.GC24267@dhcp22.suse.cz> <5B619599.1000307@intel.com> <20180801113444.GK16767@dhcp22.suse.cz> <5B62DDCC.3030100@intel.com> <87d7ae45-79cb-e294-7397-0e45e2af49cd@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: <87d7ae45-79cb-e294-7397-0e45e2af49cd@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Tetsuo Handa , Michal Hocko Cc: virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mst@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org On 08/02/2018 07:00 PM, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > On 2018/08/02 19:32, Wei Wang wrote: >> On 08/01/2018 07:34 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: >>> Do you have any numbers for how does this work in practice? >> It works in this way: for example, we can set the parameter, balloon_pages_to_shrink, >> to shrink 1GB memory once shrink scan is called. Now, we have a 8GB guest, and we balloon >> out 7GB. When shrink scan is called, the balloon driver will get back 1GB memory and give >> them back to mm, then the ballooned memory becomes 6GB. > Since shrinker might be called concurrently (am I correct?), Not sure about it being concurrently, but I think it would be called repeatedly as should_continue_reclaim() returns true. Best, Wei