From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail202.messagelabs.com (mail202.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.227]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8B1FF6B01B6 for ; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 19:33:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: by iwn36 with SMTP id 36so318629iwn.14 for ; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 16:33:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20100625181221.805A.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20100625181221.805A.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 08:33:34 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmscan: recalculate lru_pages on each priority From: Minchan Kim Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: LKML , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Rik van Riel , Johannes Weiner List-ID: On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 6:13 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > shrink_zones() need relatively long time. and lru_pages can be > changed dramatically while shrink_zones(). > then, lru_pages need recalculate on each priority. > > Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim Kosaki's patch seems to be reasonable to me. I looked into background reclaim. It already has done until now. (ie, background : dynamic lru_pages in each priority, direct reclaim : static lru_pages in each priority). Firstly In 53dce00d, Andrew did it. Why does he do it with unbalance? I guess it was just a mistake. -- 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