All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
diff for duplicates of <20110901082755.GD22561@redhat.com>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 47a897b..727fad8 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -3,16 +3,16 @@ On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 12:04:24AM -0700, Ying Han wrote:
 > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 11:05:51PM -0700, Ying Han wrote:
 > >> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com> wrote:
 > >> > You want to look at A and see whether its limit was responsible for
-> >> > reclaim scans in any children.  IMO, that is asking the question
-> >> > backwards.  Instead, there is a cgroup under reclaim and one wants to
-> >> > find out the cause for that.  Not the other way round.
+> >> > reclaim scans in any children.  IMO, that is asking the question
+> >> > backwards.  Instead, there is a cgroup under reclaim and one wants to
+> >> > find out the cause for that.  Not the other way round.
 > >> >
 > >> > In my original proposal I suggested differentiating reclaim caused by
 > >> > internal pressure (due to own limit) and reclaim caused by
 > >> > external/hierarchical pressure (due to limits from parents).
 > >> >
 > >> > If you want to find out why C is under reclaim, look at its reclaim
-> >> > statistics.  If the _limit numbers are high, C's limit is the problem.
+> >> > statistics.  If the _limit numbers are high, C's limit is the problem.
 > >> > If the _hierarchical numbers are high, the problem is B, A, or
 > >> > physical memory, so you check B for _limit and _hierarchical as well,
 > >> > then move on to A.
@@ -21,8 +21,8 @@ On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 12:04:24AM -0700, Ying Han wrote:
 > >> > scan (victim) to the reclaim code, but also the memcg /causing/ the
 > >> > reclaim (root_mem):
 > >> >
-> >> >        root_mem == victim -> account to victim as _limit
-> >> >        root_mem != victim -> account to victim as _hierarchical
+> >> >        root_mem == victim -> account to victim as _limit
+> >> >        root_mem != victim -> account to victim as _hierarchical
 > >> >
 > >> > This would make things much simpler and more natural, both the code
 > >> > and the way of tracking down a problem, IMO.
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 12:04:24AM -0700, Ying Han wrote:
 > >> per-memcg reclaim.
 > >> "_under_hiearchy" is set if memcg is not the one triggering pressure.
 > >
-> > I don't get this distinction between _system and _limit.  How is it
+> > I don't get this distinction between _system and _limit.  How is it
 > > orthogonal to _limit vs. _hierarchy, i.e. internal vs. external?
 > 
 > Something like :
@@ -103,3 +103,10 @@ limit.
 What makes the physical memory limit special that requires the
 resulting reclaims to be designated over reclaims due to other
 hierarchical limits?
+
+--
+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>
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index 57c199d..5f162ad 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -26,16 +26,16 @@
  "> > On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 11:05:51PM -0700, Ying Han wrote:\n"
  "> >> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com> wrote:\n"
  "> >> > You want to look at A and see whether its limit was responsible for\n"
- "> >> > reclaim scans in any children. \302\240IMO, that is asking the question\n"
- "> >> > backwards. \302\240Instead, there is a cgroup under reclaim and one wants to\n"
- "> >> > find out the cause for that. \302\240Not the other way round.\n"
+ "> >> > reclaim scans in any children.  IMO, that is asking the question\n"
+ "> >> > backwards.  Instead, there is a cgroup under reclaim and one wants to\n"
+ "> >> > find out the cause for that.  Not the other way round.\n"
  "> >> >\n"
  "> >> > In my original proposal I suggested differentiating reclaim caused by\n"
  "> >> > internal pressure (due to own limit) and reclaim caused by\n"
  "> >> > external/hierarchical pressure (due to limits from parents).\n"
  "> >> >\n"
  "> >> > If you want to find out why C is under reclaim, look at its reclaim\n"
- "> >> > statistics. \302\240If the _limit numbers are high, C's limit is the problem.\n"
+ "> >> > statistics.  If the _limit numbers are high, C's limit is the problem.\n"
  "> >> > If the _hierarchical numbers are high, the problem is B, A, or\n"
  "> >> > physical memory, so you check B for _limit and _hierarchical as well,\n"
  "> >> > then move on to A.\n"
@@ -44,8 +44,8 @@
  "> >> > scan (victim) to the reclaim code, but also the memcg /causing/ the\n"
  "> >> > reclaim (root_mem):\n"
  "> >> >\n"
- "> >> > \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240root_mem == victim -> account to victim as _limit\n"
- "> >> > \302\240 \302\240 \302\240 \302\240root_mem != victim -> account to victim as _hierarchical\n"
+ "> >> >        root_mem == victim -> account to victim as _limit\n"
+ "> >> >        root_mem != victim -> account to victim as _hierarchical\n"
  "> >> >\n"
  "> >> > This would make things much simpler and more natural, both the code\n"
  "> >> > and the way of tracking down a problem, IMO.\n"
@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@
  "> >> per-memcg reclaim.\n"
  "> >> \"_under_hiearchy\" is set if memcg is not the one triggering pressure.\n"
  "> >\n"
- "> > I don't get this distinction between _system and _limit. \302\240How is it\n"
+ "> > I don't get this distinction between _system and _limit.  How is it\n"
  "> > orthogonal to _limit vs. _hierarchy, i.e. internal vs. external?\n"
  "> \n"
  "> Something like :\n"
@@ -125,6 +125,13 @@
  "\n"
  "What makes the physical memory limit special that requires the\n"
  "resulting reclaims to be designated over reclaims due to other\n"
- hierarchical limits?
+ "hierarchical limits?\n"
+ "\n"
+ "--\n"
+ "To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in\n"
+ "the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,\n"
+ "see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .\n"
+ "Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/\n"
+ "Don't email: <a href=mailto:\"dont@kvack.org\"> email@kvack.org </a>"
 
-94eca36d028a983d26d21dc398dcf25719fef4c8b766158f01d041ffdeff9c15
+4c7fff129577a0d192d8b12e02443f18764ec317b0929caf77c8ff36b0cf0710

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.