From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E186A6B01F1 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 21:41:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: by iwn33 with SMTP id 33so2772737iwn.14 for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 18:41:48 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20100827012147.GC7353@localhost> References: <1282835656-5638-1-git-send-email-mel@csn.ul.ie> <20100826172038.GA6873@barrios-desktop> <20100827012147.GC7353@localhost> Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 10:41:48 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Do not wait the full timeout on congestion_wait when there is no congestion From: Minchan Kim Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Wu Fengguang Cc: Mel Gorman , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , Andrew Morton , Christian Ehrhardt , Johannes Weiner , Jan Kara , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Rik van Riel , KOSAKI Motohiro , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Li Shaohua List-ID: Hi, Wu. On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Wu Fengguang wrote: > Minchan, > > It's much cleaner to keep the unchanged congestion_wait() and add a > congestion_wait_check() for converting problematic wait sites. The > too_many_isolated() wait is merely a protective mechanism, I won't > bother to improve it at the cost of more code. You means following as? while (unlikely(too_many_isolated(zone, file, sc))) { congestion_wait_check(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10); /* We are about to die and free our memory. Return now. */ if (fatal_signal_pending(current)) return SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX; } > > Thanks, > Fengguang > -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- 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: email@kvack.org