From: Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>
To: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: forbid lumpy-reclaim in shrink_active_list()
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 15:35:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120319143519.GD1699@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120319091821.17716.54031.stgit@zurg>
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 01:18:21PM +0400, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> This patch reset reclaim mode in shrink_active_list() to RECLAIM_MODE_SINGLE | RECLAIM_MODE_ASYNC.
> (sync/async sign is used only in shrink_page_list and does not affect shrink_active_list)
>
> Currenly shrink_active_list() sometimes works in lumpy-reclaim mode,
> if RECLAIM_MODE_LUMPYRECLAIM left over from earlier shrink_inactive_list().
> Meanwhile, in age_active_anon() sc->reclaim_mode is totally zero.
> So, current behavior is too complex and confusing, all this looks like bug.
>
> In general, shrink_active_list() populate inactive list for next shrink_inactive_list().
> Lumpy shring_inactive_list() isolate pages around choosen one from both active and
> inactive lists. So, there no reasons for lumpy-isolation in shrink_active_list()
>
> Proposed-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
> Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/3/15/583
> Signed-off-by: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
--
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: Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>
To: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: forbid lumpy-reclaim in shrink_active_list()
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 15:35:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120319143519.GD1699@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120319091821.17716.54031.stgit@zurg>
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 01:18:21PM +0400, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> This patch reset reclaim mode in shrink_active_list() to RECLAIM_MODE_SINGLE | RECLAIM_MODE_ASYNC.
> (sync/async sign is used only in shrink_page_list and does not affect shrink_active_list)
>
> Currenly shrink_active_list() sometimes works in lumpy-reclaim mode,
> if RECLAIM_MODE_LUMPYRECLAIM left over from earlier shrink_inactive_list().
> Meanwhile, in age_active_anon() sc->reclaim_mode is totally zero.
> So, current behavior is too complex and confusing, all this looks like bug.
>
> In general, shrink_active_list() populate inactive list for next shrink_inactive_list().
> Lumpy shring_inactive_list() isolate pages around choosen one from both active and
> inactive lists. So, there no reasons for lumpy-isolation in shrink_active_list()
>
> Proposed-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
> Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/3/15/583
> Signed-off-by: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-19 14:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-19 9:18 [PATCH] mm: forbid lumpy-reclaim in shrink_active_list() Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-19 9:18 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-19 14:35 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2012-03-19 14:35 ` Johannes Weiner
2012-03-19 17:40 ` Rik van Riel
2012-03-19 17:40 ` Rik van Riel
2012-03-19 17:58 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-19 17:58 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-19 18:03 ` Rik van Riel
2012-03-19 18:03 ` Rik van Riel
2012-03-19 20:05 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-19 20:05 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-19 20:14 ` Rik van Riel
2012-03-19 20:14 ` Rik van Riel
2012-03-21 11:45 ` Mel Gorman
2012-03-21 11:45 ` Mel Gorman
2012-03-21 0:28 ` Minchan Kim
2012-03-21 0:28 ` Minchan Kim
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=20120319143519.GD1699@redhat.com \
--to=jweiner@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=khlebnikov@openvz.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--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.