From: Satoru Moriya <satoru.moriya@hds.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
"lwoodman@redhat.com" <lwoodman@redhat.com>,
"jweiner@redhat.com" <jweiner@redhat.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Richard Davies <richard.davies@elastichosts.com>,
Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@hds.com>,
"dle-develop@lists.sourceforge.net"
<dle-develop@lists.sourceforge.net>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Subject: [PATCH RESEND] avoid swapping out with swappiness==0
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 16:41:04 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <65795E11DBF1E645A09CEC7EAEE94B9C015A48DF62@USINDEVS02.corp.hds.com> (raw)
Hi Andrew,
This patch has been reviewed for couple of months.
This patch *only* improves the behavior when the kernel has
enough filebacked pages. It means that it does not change
the behavior when kernel has small number of filebacked pages.
Kosaki-san pointed out that the threshold which we use
to decide whether filebacked page is enough or not is not
appropriate(*).
(*) http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg32380.html
As I described in (**), I believe that threshold discussion
should be done in other thread because it affects not only
swappiness=0 case and the kernel behave the same way with
or without this patch below the threshold.
(**) http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg34317.html
The patch may not be perfect but, at least, we can improve
the kernel behavior in the enough filebacked memory case
with this patch. I believe it's better than nothing.
Do you have any comments about it?
NOTE: I updated the patch with Acked-by tags
---
Sometimes we'd like to avoid swapping out anonymous memory
in particular, avoid swapping out pages of important process or
process groups while there is a reasonable amount of pagecache
on RAM so that we can satisfy our customers' requirements.
OTOH, we can control how aggressive the kernel will swap memory pages
with /proc/sys/vm/swappiness for global and
/sys/fs/cgroup/memory/memory.swappiness for each memcg.
But with current reclaim implementation, the kernel may swap out
even if we set swappiness==0 and there is pagecache on RAM.
This patch changes the behavior with swappiness==0. If we set
swappiness==0, the kernel does not swap out completely
(for global reclaim until the amount of free pages and filebacked
pages in a zone has been reduced to something very very small
(nr_free + nr_filebacked < high watermark)).
Any comments are welcome.
Regards,
Satoru Moriya
Signed-off-by: Satoru Moriya <satoru.moriya@hds.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
---
mm/vmscan.c | 6 +++---
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index 33dc256..52d64bf 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -1983,10 +1983,10 @@ static void get_scan_count(struct mem_cgroup_zone *mz, struct scan_control *sc,
* proportional to the fraction of recently scanned pages on
* each list that were recently referenced and in active use.
*/
- ap = (anon_prio + 1) * (reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[0] + 1);
+ ap = anon_prio * (reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[0] + 1);
ap /= reclaim_stat->recent_rotated[0] + 1;
- fp = (file_prio + 1) * (reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[1] + 1);
+ fp = file_prio * (reclaim_stat->recent_scanned[1] + 1);
fp /= reclaim_stat->recent_rotated[1] + 1;
spin_unlock_irq(&mz->zone->lru_lock);
@@ -1999,7 +1999,7 @@ out:
unsigned long scan;
scan = zone_nr_lru_pages(mz, lru);
- if (priority || noswap) {
+ if (priority || noswap || !vmscan_swappiness(mz, sc)) {
scan >>= priority;
if (!scan && force_scan)
scan = SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX;
--
1.7.6.5
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next reply other threads:[~2012-05-23 20:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-23 20:41 Satoru Moriya [this message]
2012-05-23 21:45 ` Rik van Riel
2012-05-24 9:15 ` Jerome Marchand
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=65795E11DBF1E645A09CEC7EAEE94B9C015A48DF62@USINDEVS02.corp.hds.com \
--to=satoru.moriya@hds.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=dle-develop@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=jmarchan@redhat.com \
--cc=jweiner@redhat.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lwoodman@redhat.com \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=richard.davies@elastichosts.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=seiji.aguchi@hds.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