All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmscan: fix get_scan_ratio comment
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:53:57 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4921BDC5.4090303@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0811170932390.3468@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>

Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Anyway, without quoting, the thing is - your fix isn't any better. The 
> more interesting part is how the fractions get combined, and that is 
> indeed approximately "anon% = anon / (anon + file)".

Well, the "anon" and "file" in that calculation are the
scanned/rotated ratios for anon and file pages, not the
sizes of the lists.

> So you in many ways made the comment worse. It wasn't good before, but 
> it's still not good, and now it comments on the part that isn't even 
> interesting (ie it comments the _trivial_ fractional part)

How about something like the following: ?

/*
  * The amount of pressure on anon vs file pages is inversely
  * proportional to the fraction of recently scanned pages on
  * each list that were recently referenced and in active use.
  */

(I'll mail the next patches out with claws-mail - silly thunderbird)

-- 
All rights reversed.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmscan: fix get_scan_ratio comment
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:53:57 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4921BDC5.4090303@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0811170932390.3468@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>

Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Anyway, without quoting, the thing is - your fix isn't any better. The 
> more interesting part is how the fractions get combined, and that is 
> indeed approximately "anon% = anon / (anon + file)".

Well, the "anon" and "file" in that calculation are the
scanned/rotated ratios for anon and file pages, not the
sizes of the lists.

> So you in many ways made the comment worse. It wasn't good before, but 
> it's still not good, and now it comments on the part that isn't even 
> interesting (ie it comments the _trivial_ fractional part)

How about something like the following: ?

/*
  * The amount of pressure on anon vs file pages is inversely
  * proportional to the fraction of recently scanned pages on
  * each list that were recently referenced and in active use.
  */

(I'll mail the next patches out with claws-mail - silly thunderbird)

-- 
All rights reversed.

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2008-11-17 18:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-11-15  9:38 [PATCH] mm: evict streaming IO cache first KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-15  9:38 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-16  0:58 ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-16  0:58   ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-16  5:00 ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-16  5:00   ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-16 18:15   ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-16 18:15     ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-16 21:20     ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-16 21:20       ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-16 21:28       ` Hugh Dickins
2008-11-16 21:28         ` Hugh Dickins
2008-11-17  4:47       ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-17  4:47         ` Andrew Morton
2008-11-17  6:19         ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-17  6:19           ` Nick Piggin
2008-11-17  6:30         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-17  6:30           ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-17  6:39           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-17  6:39             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-17  6:54             ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-17  6:54               ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-17  7:03               ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-17  7:03                 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-17  8:22                 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-17  8:22                   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-11-17  8:32                   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-17  8:32                     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-17 16:22                   ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-17 16:22                     ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-17 16:22               ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-17 16:22                 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-17 16:27                 ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-17 16:27                   ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-17 16:37                 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-17 16:37                   ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-17 16:54                   ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-17 16:54                     ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-17 17:06                     ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-17 17:06                       ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-17 17:16                       ` [PATCH] vmscan: fix get_scan_ratio comment Rik van Riel
2008-11-17 17:32                         ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-17 17:32                           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-11-17 17:35                         ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-17 17:35                           ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-17 18:53                           ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2008-11-17 18:53                             ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-17 20:23                             ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-17 20:23                               ` Rik van Riel
2008-11-18  0:06                 ` [PATCH] vmscan: evict streaming IO first Rik van Riel
2008-11-18  0:06                   ` Rik van Riel
2008-12-01 20:24                   ` Andrew Morton
2008-12-01 20:24                     ` Andrew Morton

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=4921BDC5.4090303@redhat.com \
    --to=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=gene.heskett@gmail.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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.