From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: bail out in shrin_inactive_list
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 17:27:01 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160726082701.GA9950@bbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160726074650.GW11400@suse.de>
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 08:46:50AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:21:57AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > I believe proper fix is to modify get_scan_count. IOW, I think
> > > > we should introduce lruvec_reclaimable_lru_size with proper
> > > > classzone_idx but I don't know how we can fix it with memcg
> > > > which doesn't have zone stat now. should introduce zone stat
> > > > back to memcg? Or, it's okay to ignore memcg?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I think it's ok to ignore memcg in this case as a memcg shrink is often
> > > going to be for pages that can use highmem anyway.
> >
> > So, you mean it's okay to ignore kmemcg case?
> > If memcg guys agree it, I want to make get_scan_count consider
> > reclaimable lru size under the reclaim constraint, instead.
> >
>
> For now, I believe yet. My understanding is that the primary use cases
> for kmemcg is systems running large numbers of containers. It consider
> it extremely unlikely that large 32-bit systems are being used for large
> numbers of containers and require usage of kmemcg.
Okay, Then how about this?
I didn't test it but I guess it should work.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-26 8:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-25 7:51 [RFC] mm: bail out in shrin_inactive_list Minchan Kim
2016-07-25 9:29 ` Mel Gorman
2016-07-26 1:21 ` Minchan Kim
2016-07-26 7:46 ` Mel Gorman
2016-07-26 8:27 ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2016-07-29 14:11 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-08-01 23:46 ` 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=20160726082701.GA9950@bbox \
--to=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=vdavydov@virtuozzo.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).