From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] writeback: Prioritise dirty inodes encountered by reclaim for background flushing Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 07:08:07 -0400 Message-ID: <20100728110807.GB31360@infradead.org> References: <1280312843-11789-1-git-send-email-mel@csn.ul.ie> <1280312843-11789-10-git-send-email-mel@csn.ul.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Dave Chinner , Chris Mason , Nick Piggin , Rik van Riel , Johannes Weiner , Christoph Hellwig , Wu Fengguang , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , KOSAKI Motohiro , Andrea Arcangeli To: Mel Gorman Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1280312843-11789-10-git-send-email-mel@csn.ul.ie> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 11:27:23AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > It is preferable that as few dirty pages are dispatched for cleaning from > the page reclaim path. When dirty pages are encountered by page reclaim, > this patch marks the inodes that they should be dispatched immediately. When > the background flusher runs, it moves such inodes immediately to the dispatch > queue regardless of inode age. Thus whole thing looks rather hacky to me. Does it really give a large enough benefit to be worth all the hacks? -- 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: email@kvack.org