From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7C5436B016A for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 19:28:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:28:34 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] vmscan: fix initial shrinker size handling Message-ID: <20110822232834.GV3162@dastard> References: <20110822101721.19462.63082.stgit@zurg> <20110822143006.60f4b560.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110822143006.60f4b560.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 02:30:06PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 22 Aug 2011 14:17:21 +0300 > Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote: > > > Shrinker function can returns -1, it means it cannot do anything without a risk of deadlock. > > For example prune_super() do this if it cannot grab superblock refrence, even if nr_to_scan=0. > > Currenly we interpret this like ULONG_MAX size shrinker, evaluate total_scan according this, > > and next time this shrinker can get really big pressure. Let's skip such shrinkers instead. > > Yes, that looks like a significant oversight. > > > Also make total_scan signed, otherwise check (total_scan < 0) below never works. > > Hopefully a smaller oversight. Yeah, it was, but is harmless because it is caught by the next check of total_scanned. I've made similar "make everything signed" changes as well. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com -- 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: email@kvack.org