From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ADD4C433DF for ; Wed, 20 May 2020 23:42:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3640C20823 for ; Wed, 20 May 2020 23:42:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1590018165; bh=l2mS/FNkusn6YLF9oQ03x6lf0x9xSKXhbjmtXuuKOEU=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-ID:From; b=JHR5SHh5yV36oi3tw7pb9hjZ3JIdBBzKoTSX188XD8hdMOBViqyY5OORAKjSZ1mHW K0MM1Hs39bdaN1NF+g3Guq+hv0csRF5BwEa0ZzgpSBRdDPDJOPgwa+dhLTvi6/n0an q8pYh8/jtsagiXxVxYY47jscnAx+0JPAtHjjoVEM= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728055AbgETXmo (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 May 2020 19:42:44 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:36134 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726688AbgETXmo (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 May 2020 19:42:44 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-73-231-172-41.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [73.231.172.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B8BD92072C; Wed, 20 May 2020 23:42:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1590018164; bh=l2mS/FNkusn6YLF9oQ03x6lf0x9xSKXhbjmtXuuKOEU=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=qJ+3eof3hck1Gh1nBa2/+j6vwmtmoQW2xYQ0eTC853DIb8H/4+cHCLfaXLzznyRd6 ZFvs8b1FX05UdabsiW4zNAhkt+Oi8JMbHMFNUnude+cklLBNZvcgSEyR+fU9qXbBDa 2AkRUBPbAjt3JLK7Wd6YJ3db43kp8TzLxIItbyQo= Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 16:42:43 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Chris Down , Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, memcg: unify reclaim retry limits with page allocator Message-Id: <20200520164243.56133fa135f65cc708e70ec0@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20200520164037.e3598bc902e39415f4c263e7@linux-foundation.org> References: <20200520163142.GA808793@chrisdown.name> <20200520164037.e3598bc902e39415f4c263e7@linux-foundation.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.5.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 20 May 2020 16:40:37 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote: > > -/* The number of times we should retry reclaim failures before giving up. */ > > hm, what tree is this against? Ah, my habit of working in reverse time order sometimes does this ;) I suggest that "mm, memcg: reclaim more aggressively before high allocator throttling" and this patch become a two-patch series?