From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 -mm 1/3] mm: reclaim at order 0 when compaction is enabled
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 10:26:42 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120130102642.GA25268@csn.ul.ie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F22D236.4@redhat.com>
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 11:35:02AM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 01/27/2012 04:13 AM, Hillf Danton wrote:
>
> >>@@ -1195,7 +1195,7 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> >> BUG();
> >> }
> >>
> >>- if (!order)
> >>+ if (!sc->order || !(sc->reclaim_mode& RECLAIM_MODE_LUMPYRECLAIM))
> >> continue;
> >>
> >Just a tiny advice 8-)
> >
> >mind to move checking lumpy reclaim out of the loop,
> >something like
>
> Hehe, I made the change the way it is on request
> of Mel Gorman :)
>
Yes. I recognise that checking inside the loop like this results
in a tiny hit but it is hardly critical. By putting the check here,
it is absolutely clear that this is now a lumpy-reclaim only thing
where it used to be used by both lumpy reclaim and reclaim/compaction.
It'll make deleting lumpy reclaim a little bit easier in the future.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
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>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 -mm 1/3] mm: reclaim at order 0 when compaction is enabled
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 10:26:42 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120130102642.GA25268@csn.ul.ie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F22D236.4@redhat.com>
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 11:35:02AM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 01/27/2012 04:13 AM, Hillf Danton wrote:
>
> >>@@ -1195,7 +1195,7 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> >> BUG();
> >> }
> >>
> >>- if (!order)
> >>+ if (!sc->order || !(sc->reclaim_mode& RECLAIM_MODE_LUMPYRECLAIM))
> >> continue;
> >>
> >Just a tiny advice 8-)
> >
> >mind to move checking lumpy reclaim out of the loop,
> >something like
>
> Hehe, I made the change the way it is on request
> of Mel Gorman :)
>
Yes. I recognise that checking inside the loop like this results
in a tiny hit but it is hardly critical. By putting the check here,
it is absolutely clear that this is now a lumpy-reclaim only thing
where it used to be used by both lumpy reclaim and reclaim/compaction.
It'll make deleting lumpy reclaim a little bit easier in the future.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-30 10:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-26 19:54 [PATCH v3 -mm 0/3] kswapd vs compaction improvements Rik van Riel
2012-01-26 19:54 ` Rik van Riel
2012-01-26 19:59 ` [PATCH v3 -mm 1/3] mm: reclaim at order 0 when compaction is enabled Rik van Riel
2012-01-26 19:59 ` Rik van Riel
2012-01-27 9:13 ` Hillf Danton
2012-01-27 9:13 ` Hillf Danton
2012-01-27 16:35 ` Rik van Riel
2012-01-27 16:35 ` Rik van Riel
2012-01-30 10:26 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2012-01-30 10:26 ` Mel Gorman
2012-01-27 23:31 ` Andrew Morton
2012-01-27 23:31 ` Andrew Morton
2012-01-29 13:25 ` Hillf Danton
2012-01-29 13:25 ` Hillf Danton
2012-01-30 10:36 ` Mel Gorman
2012-01-30 10:36 ` Mel Gorman
2012-01-26 19:59 ` [PATCH v3 -mm 2/3] mm: kswapd carefully call compaction Rik van Riel
2012-01-26 19:59 ` Rik van Riel
2012-01-27 23:36 ` Andrew Morton
2012-01-27 23:36 ` Andrew Morton
2012-01-26 20:01 ` [PATCH v3 -mm 3/3] mm: only defer compaction for failed order and higher Rik van Riel
2012-01-26 20:01 ` Rik van Riel
2012-01-30 10:47 ` Mel Gorman
2012-01-30 10:47 ` Mel Gorman
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=20120130102642.GA25268@csn.ul.ie \
--to=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhillf@gmail.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.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 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.