From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Andrea Righi <arighi@develer.com>
Cc: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mmotm 3/3] memcg: dirty pages instrumentation
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2010 14:48:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1267537736.25158.54.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1267478620-5276-4-git-send-email-arighi@develer.com>
On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 22:23 +0100, Andrea Righi wrote:
> Apply the cgroup dirty pages accounting and limiting infrastructure to
> the opportune kernel functions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <arighi@develer.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
> index 5a0f8f3..d83f41c 100644
> --- a/mm/page-writeback.c
> +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
> @@ -137,13 +137,14 @@ static struct prop_descriptor vm_dirties;
> */
> static int calc_period_shift(void)
> {
> - unsigned long dirty_total;
> + unsigned long dirty_total, dirty_bytes;
>
> - if (vm_dirty_bytes)
> - dirty_total = vm_dirty_bytes / PAGE_SIZE;
> + dirty_bytes = mem_cgroup_dirty_bytes();
> + if (dirty_bytes)
So you don't think 0 is a valid max dirty amount?
> + dirty_total = dirty_bytes / PAGE_SIZE;
> else
> - dirty_total = (vm_dirty_ratio * determine_dirtyable_memory()) /
> - 100;
> + dirty_total = (mem_cgroup_dirty_ratio() *
> + determine_dirtyable_memory()) / 100;
> return 2 + ilog2(dirty_total - 1);
> }
>
> @@ -408,14 +409,16 @@ static unsigned long highmem_dirtyable_memory(unsigned long total)
> */
> unsigned long determine_dirtyable_memory(void)
> {
> - unsigned long x;
> -
> - x = global_page_state(NR_FREE_PAGES) + global_reclaimable_pages();
> + unsigned long memory;
> + s64 memcg_memory;
>
> + memory = global_page_state(NR_FREE_PAGES) + global_reclaimable_pages();
> if (!vm_highmem_is_dirtyable)
> - x -= highmem_dirtyable_memory(x);
> -
> - return x + 1; /* Ensure that we never return 0 */
> + memory -= highmem_dirtyable_memory(memory);
> + memcg_memory = mem_cgroup_page_stat(MEMCG_NR_DIRTYABLE_PAGES);
> + if (memcg_memory < 0)
And here you somehow return negative?
> + return memory + 1;
> + return min((unsigned long)memcg_memory, memory + 1);
> }
>
> void
> @@ -423,26 +426,28 @@ get_dirty_limits(unsigned long *pbackground, unsigned long *pdirty,
> unsigned long *pbdi_dirty, struct backing_dev_info *bdi)
> {
> unsigned long background;
> - unsigned long dirty;
> + unsigned long dirty, dirty_bytes, dirty_background;
> unsigned long available_memory = determine_dirtyable_memory();
> struct task_struct *tsk;
>
> - if (vm_dirty_bytes)
> - dirty = DIV_ROUND_UP(vm_dirty_bytes, PAGE_SIZE);
> + dirty_bytes = mem_cgroup_dirty_bytes();
> + if (dirty_bytes)
zero not valid again
> + dirty = DIV_ROUND_UP(dirty_bytes, PAGE_SIZE);
> else {
> int dirty_ratio;
>
> - dirty_ratio = vm_dirty_ratio;
> + dirty_ratio = mem_cgroup_dirty_ratio();
> if (dirty_ratio < 5)
> dirty_ratio = 5;
> dirty = (dirty_ratio * available_memory) / 100;
> }
>
> - if (dirty_background_bytes)
> - background = DIV_ROUND_UP(dirty_background_bytes, PAGE_SIZE);
> + dirty_background = mem_cgroup_dirty_background_bytes();
> + if (dirty_background)
idem
> + background = DIV_ROUND_UP(dirty_background, PAGE_SIZE);
> else
> - background = (dirty_background_ratio * available_memory) / 100;
> -
> + background = (mem_cgroup_dirty_background_ratio() *
> + available_memory) / 100;
> if (background >= dirty)
> background = dirty / 2;
> tsk = current;
> @@ -508,9 +513,13 @@ static void balance_dirty_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
> get_dirty_limits(&background_thresh, &dirty_thresh,
> &bdi_thresh, bdi);
>
> - nr_reclaimable = global_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY) +
> + nr_reclaimable = mem_cgroup_page_stat(MEMCG_NR_RECLAIM_PAGES);
> + nr_writeback = mem_cgroup_page_stat(MEMCG_NR_WRITEBACK);
> + if ((nr_reclaimable < 0) || (nr_writeback < 0)) {
> + nr_reclaimable = global_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY) +
> global_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS);
??? why would a page_state be negative.. I see you return -ENOMEM on !
cgroup, but how can one specify no dirty limit with this compiled in?
> - nr_writeback = global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK);
> + nr_writeback = global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK);
> + }
>
> bdi_nr_reclaimable = bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_DIRTY);
> if (bdi_cap_account_unstable(bdi)) {
> @@ -611,10 +620,12 @@ static void balance_dirty_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
> * In normal mode, we start background writeout at the lower
> * background_thresh, to keep the amount of dirty memory low.
> */
> + nr_reclaimable = mem_cgroup_page_stat(MEMCG_NR_RECLAIM_PAGES);
> + if (nr_reclaimable < 0)
> + nr_reclaimable = global_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY) +
> + global_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS);
Again..
> if ((laptop_mode && pages_written) ||
> - (!laptop_mode && ((global_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY)
> - + global_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS))
> - > background_thresh)))
> + (!laptop_mode && (nr_reclaimable > background_thresh)))
> bdi_start_writeback(bdi, NULL, 0);
> }
>
> @@ -678,6 +689,8 @@ void throttle_vm_writeout(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> unsigned long dirty_thresh;
>
> for ( ; ; ) {
> + unsigned long dirty;
> +
> get_dirty_limits(&background_thresh, &dirty_thresh, NULL, NULL);
>
> /*
> @@ -686,10 +699,14 @@ void throttle_vm_writeout(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> */
> dirty_thresh += dirty_thresh / 10; /* wheeee... */
>
> - if (global_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS) +
> - global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK) <= dirty_thresh)
> - break;
> - congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10);
> +
> + dirty = mem_cgroup_page_stat(MEMCG_NR_DIRTY_WRITEBACK_PAGES);
> + if (dirty < 0)
> + dirty = global_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS) +
> + global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK);
and again..
> + if (dirty <= dirty_thresh)
> + break;
> + congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10);
>
> /*
> * The caller might hold locks which can prevent IO completion
This is ugly and broken.. I thought you'd agreed to something like:
if (mem_cgroup_has_dirty_limit(cgroup))
use mem_cgroup numbers
else
use global numbers
That allows for a 0 dirty limit (which should work and basically makes
all io synchronous).
Also, I'd put each of those in a separate function, like:
unsigned long reclaimable_pages(cgroup)
{
if (mem_cgroup_has_dirty_limit(cgroup))
return mem_cgroup_page_stat(MEMCG_NR_RECLAIM_PAGES);
return global_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY) + global_page_state(NR_NFS_UNSTABLE);
}
Which raises another question, you should probably rebase on top of
Trond's patches, which removes BDI_RECLAIMABLE, suggesting you also
loose MEMCG_NR_RECLAIM_PAGES in favour of the DIRTY+UNSTABLE split.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Andrea Righi <arighi@develer.com>
Cc: Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mmotm 3/3] memcg: dirty pages instrumentation
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2010 14:48:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1267537736.25158.54.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1267478620-5276-4-git-send-email-arighi@develer.com>
On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 22:23 +0100, Andrea Righi wrote:
> Apply the cgroup dirty pages accounting and limiting infrastructure to
> the opportune kernel functions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <arighi@develer.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
> index 5a0f8f3..d83f41c 100644
> --- a/mm/page-writeback.c
> +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
> @@ -137,13 +137,14 @@ static struct prop_descriptor vm_dirties;
> */
> static int calc_period_shift(void)
> {
> - unsigned long dirty_total;
> + unsigned long dirty_total, dirty_bytes;
>
> - if (vm_dirty_bytes)
> - dirty_total = vm_dirty_bytes / PAGE_SIZE;
> + dirty_bytes = mem_cgroup_dirty_bytes();
> + if (dirty_bytes)
So you don't think 0 is a valid max dirty amount?
> + dirty_total = dirty_bytes / PAGE_SIZE;
> else
> - dirty_total = (vm_dirty_ratio * determine_dirtyable_memory()) /
> - 100;
> + dirty_total = (mem_cgroup_dirty_ratio() *
> + determine_dirtyable_memory()) / 100;
> return 2 + ilog2(dirty_total - 1);
> }
>
> @@ -408,14 +409,16 @@ static unsigned long highmem_dirtyable_memory(unsigned long total)
> */
> unsigned long determine_dirtyable_memory(void)
> {
> - unsigned long x;
> -
> - x = global_page_state(NR_FREE_PAGES) + global_reclaimable_pages();
> + unsigned long memory;
> + s64 memcg_memory;
>
> + memory = global_page_state(NR_FREE_PAGES) + global_reclaimable_pages();
> if (!vm_highmem_is_dirtyable)
> - x -= highmem_dirtyable_memory(x);
> -
> - return x + 1; /* Ensure that we never return 0 */
> + memory -= highmem_dirtyable_memory(memory);
> + memcg_memory = mem_cgroup_page_stat(MEMCG_NR_DIRTYABLE_PAGES);
> + if (memcg_memory < 0)
And here you somehow return negative?
> + return memory + 1;
> + return min((unsigned long)memcg_memory, memory + 1);
> }
>
> void
> @@ -423,26 +426,28 @@ get_dirty_limits(unsigned long *pbackground, unsigned long *pdirty,
> unsigned long *pbdi_dirty, struct backing_dev_info *bdi)
> {
> unsigned long background;
> - unsigned long dirty;
> + unsigned long dirty, dirty_bytes, dirty_background;
> unsigned long available_memory = determine_dirtyable_memory();
> struct task_struct *tsk;
>
> - if (vm_dirty_bytes)
> - dirty = DIV_ROUND_UP(vm_dirty_bytes, PAGE_SIZE);
> + dirty_bytes = mem_cgroup_dirty_bytes();
> + if (dirty_bytes)
zero not valid again
> + dirty = DIV_ROUND_UP(dirty_bytes, PAGE_SIZE);
> else {
> int dirty_ratio;
>
> - dirty_ratio = vm_dirty_ratio;
> + dirty_ratio = mem_cgroup_dirty_ratio();
> if (dirty_ratio < 5)
> dirty_ratio = 5;
> dirty = (dirty_ratio * available_memory) / 100;
> }
>
> - if (dirty_background_bytes)
> - background = DIV_ROUND_UP(dirty_background_bytes, PAGE_SIZE);
> + dirty_background = mem_cgroup_dirty_background_bytes();
> + if (dirty_background)
idem
> + background = DIV_ROUND_UP(dirty_background, PAGE_SIZE);
> else
> - background = (dirty_background_ratio * available_memory) / 100;
> -
> + background = (mem_cgroup_dirty_background_ratio() *
> + available_memory) / 100;
> if (background >= dirty)
> background = dirty / 2;
> tsk = current;
> @@ -508,9 +513,13 @@ static void balance_dirty_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
> get_dirty_limits(&background_thresh, &dirty_thresh,
> &bdi_thresh, bdi);
>
> - nr_reclaimable = global_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY) +
> + nr_reclaimable = mem_cgroup_page_stat(MEMCG_NR_RECLAIM_PAGES);
> + nr_writeback = mem_cgroup_page_stat(MEMCG_NR_WRITEBACK);
> + if ((nr_reclaimable < 0) || (nr_writeback < 0)) {
> + nr_reclaimable = global_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY) +
> global_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS);
??? why would a page_state be negative.. I see you return -ENOMEM on !
cgroup, but how can one specify no dirty limit with this compiled in?
> - nr_writeback = global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK);
> + nr_writeback = global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK);
> + }
>
> bdi_nr_reclaimable = bdi_stat(bdi, BDI_DIRTY);
> if (bdi_cap_account_unstable(bdi)) {
> @@ -611,10 +620,12 @@ static void balance_dirty_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
> * In normal mode, we start background writeout at the lower
> * background_thresh, to keep the amount of dirty memory low.
> */
> + nr_reclaimable = mem_cgroup_page_stat(MEMCG_NR_RECLAIM_PAGES);
> + if (nr_reclaimable < 0)
> + nr_reclaimable = global_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY) +
> + global_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS);
Again..
> if ((laptop_mode && pages_written) ||
> - (!laptop_mode && ((global_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY)
> - + global_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS))
> - > background_thresh)))
> + (!laptop_mode && (nr_reclaimable > background_thresh)))
> bdi_start_writeback(bdi, NULL, 0);
> }
>
> @@ -678,6 +689,8 @@ void throttle_vm_writeout(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> unsigned long dirty_thresh;
>
> for ( ; ; ) {
> + unsigned long dirty;
> +
> get_dirty_limits(&background_thresh, &dirty_thresh, NULL, NULL);
>
> /*
> @@ -686,10 +699,14 @@ void throttle_vm_writeout(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> */
> dirty_thresh += dirty_thresh / 10; /* wheeee... */
>
> - if (global_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS) +
> - global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK) <= dirty_thresh)
> - break;
> - congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10);
> +
> + dirty = mem_cgroup_page_stat(MEMCG_NR_DIRTY_WRITEBACK_PAGES);
> + if (dirty < 0)
> + dirty = global_page_state(NR_UNSTABLE_NFS) +
> + global_page_state(NR_WRITEBACK);
and again..
> + if (dirty <= dirty_thresh)
> + break;
> + congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10);
>
> /*
> * The caller might hold locks which can prevent IO completion
This is ugly and broken.. I thought you'd agreed to something like:
if (mem_cgroup_has_dirty_limit(cgroup))
use mem_cgroup numbers
else
use global numbers
That allows for a 0 dirty limit (which should work and basically makes
all io synchronous).
Also, I'd put each of those in a separate function, like:
unsigned long reclaimable_pages(cgroup)
{
if (mem_cgroup_has_dirty_limit(cgroup))
return mem_cgroup_page_stat(MEMCG_NR_RECLAIM_PAGES);
return global_page_state(NR_FILE_DIRTY) + global_page_state(NR_NFS_UNSTABLE);
}
Which raises another question, you should probably rebase on top of
Trond's patches, which removes BDI_RECLAIMABLE, suggesting you also
loose MEMCG_NR_RECLAIM_PAGES in favour of the DIRTY+UNSTABLE split.
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-02 13:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 140+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-01 21:23 [PATCH -mmotm 0/3] memcg: per cgroup dirty limit (v3) Andrea Righi
2010-03-01 21:23 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-01 21:23 ` [PATCH -mmotm 1/3] memcg: dirty memory documentation Andrea Righi
2010-03-01 21:23 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-01 21:23 ` [PATCH -mmotm 2/3] memcg: dirty pages accounting and limiting infrastructure Andrea Righi
2010-03-01 21:23 ` Andrea Righi
[not found] ` <1267478620-5276-3-git-send-email-arighi-vWjgImWzx8FBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-02 0:20 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-02 10:04 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2010-03-02 13:02 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-02 18:08 ` Greg Thelen
2010-03-02 0:20 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-02 0:20 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-02 10:04 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2010-03-02 10:04 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
[not found] ` <cc557aab1003020204k16038838ta537357aeeb67b11-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-02 11:00 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 11:00 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 11:00 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 13:02 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-02 13:02 ` Balbir Singh
[not found] ` <20100302130223.GF3212-SINUvgVNF2CyUtPGxGje5AC/G2K4zDHf@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-02 21:50 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 21:50 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 21:50 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 18:08 ` Greg Thelen
2010-03-02 18:08 ` Greg Thelen
[not found] ` <49b004811003021008t4fae71bbu8d56192e48c32f39-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-02 22:24 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 22:24 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 22:24 ` Andrea Righi
[not found] ` <1267478620-5276-1-git-send-email-arighi-vWjgImWzx8FBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-01 21:23 ` [PATCH -mmotm 1/3] memcg: dirty memory documentation Andrea Righi
2010-03-01 21:23 ` [PATCH -mmotm 2/3] memcg: dirty pages accounting and limiting infrastructure Andrea Righi
2010-03-01 21:23 ` [PATCH -mmotm 3/3] memcg: dirty pages instrumentation Andrea Righi
2010-03-01 21:23 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-01 21:23 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-01 22:02 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-01 22:02 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-01 22:18 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-01 22:18 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 15:05 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-02 15:05 ` Vivek Goyal
[not found] ` <20100302150529.GA12855-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-02 22:22 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 22:22 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 22:22 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 23:59 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-02 23:59 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-03 11:47 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 11:47 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 11:56 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 11:56 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 11:56 ` Andrea Righi
[not found] ` <20100302235932.GA3007-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-03 11:47 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 23:59 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-02 15:05 ` Vivek Goyal
[not found] ` <20100301220208.GH3109-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-01 22:18 ` Andrea Righi
[not found] ` <1267478620-5276-4-git-send-email-arighi-vWjgImWzx8FBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-01 22:02 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-03-02 0:23 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-02 10:11 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2010-03-02 13:47 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-02 13:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-03 2:12 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-02 0:23 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-02 0:23 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-02 8:01 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 8:01 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 8:12 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-02 8:12 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-02 8:12 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-02 8:23 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-02 8:23 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-02 8:23 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
[not found] ` <20100302172316.b959b04c.kamezawa.hiroyu-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-02 13:50 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-02 13:50 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-02 13:50 ` Balbir Singh
[not found] ` <20100302135026.GH3212-SINUvgVNF2CyUtPGxGje5AC/G2K4zDHf@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-02 22:18 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 22:18 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 22:18 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 23:21 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-02 23:21 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-02 23:21 ` Daisuke Nishimura
[not found] ` <20100303082107.a29562fa.nishimura-YQH0OdQVrdy45+QrQBaojngSJqDPrsil@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-03 11:48 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 11:48 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 11:48 ` Andrea Righi
[not found] ` <20100302092309.bff454d7.kamezawa.hiroyu-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-02 8:01 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 10:11 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2010-03-02 10:11 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2010-03-02 11:02 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 11:02 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 11:09 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2010-03-02 11:09 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2010-03-02 11:34 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 11:34 ` Andrea Righi
[not found] ` <cc557aab1003020309y37587110i685d0d968bfba9f4-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-02 11:34 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 11:09 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
[not found] ` <cc557aab1003020211h391947f0p3eae04a298127d32-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-02 11:02 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 13:47 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-02 13:47 ` Balbir Singh
[not found] ` <20100302134736.GG3212-SINUvgVNF2CyUtPGxGje5AC/G2K4zDHf@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-02 13:56 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2010-03-02 13:56 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2010-03-02 13:56 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2010-03-02 13:48 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2010-03-02 13:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-02 15:26 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-02 15:26 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-02 15:26 ` Balbir Singh
2010-03-02 15:49 ` Trond Myklebust
2010-03-02 15:49 ` Trond Myklebust
2010-03-02 15:49 ` Trond Myklebust
2010-03-02 22:14 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 22:14 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-02 22:14 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 10:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-03 10:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-03 10:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-03 12:05 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 12:05 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 12:05 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 2:12 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-03 2:12 ` Daisuke Nishimura
[not found] ` <20100303111238.7133f8af.nishimura-YQH0OdQVrdy45+QrQBaojngSJqDPrsil@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-03 3:29 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-03 3:29 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-03 3:29 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-03 6:01 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-03 6:01 ` Daisuke Nishimura
[not found] ` <20100303150137.f56d7084.nishimura-YQH0OdQVrdy45+QrQBaojngSJqDPrsil@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-03 6:15 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-03 6:15 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-03 6:15 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-03 8:21 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-03 8:21 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-03 11:50 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 11:50 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 22:03 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 22:03 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 23:25 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-03 23:25 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-03 23:25 ` Daisuke Nishimura
2010-03-04 3:45 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-04 3:45 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-03-04 3:45 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
[not found] ` <20100303172132.fc6d9387.kamezawa.hiroyu-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-03 11:50 ` Andrea Righi
2010-03-03 22:03 ` Andrea Righi
[not found] ` <20100303151549.5d3d686a.kamezawa.hiroyu-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-03 8:21 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
[not found] ` <20100303122906.9c613ab2.kamezawa.hiroyu-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-03 6:01 ` Daisuke Nishimura
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=1267537736.25158.54.camel@laptop \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arighi@develer.com \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp \
--cc=suleiman@google.com \
--cc=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.