[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6d6a94c50703262044q22e94538i5e79a32a82f7c926@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 11:44:03 +0800
From: "Aubrey Li" <aubreylee@...il.com>
To: "Vaidyanathan Srinivasan" <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: "Linux Kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net,
"Balbir Singh" <balbir@...ibm.com>,
"Srivatsa Vaddagiri" <vatsa@...ibm.com>, devel@...nvz.org,
xemul@...ru, "Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>,
"Christoph Lameter" <clameter@....com>,
"Rik van Riel" <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3][RFC] Containers: Pagecache controller reclaim
On 3/6/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> The reclaim code is similar to RSS memory controller. Scan control is
> slightly different since we are targeting different type of pages.
>
> Additionally no mapped pages are touched when scanning for pagecache pages.
>
> RSS memory controller and pagecache controller share common code in reclaim
> and hence pagecache controller patches are dependent on RSS memory controller
> patch even though the features are independently configurable at compile time.
>
> --- linux-2.6.20.orig/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ linux-2.6.20/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@
>
> #include <linux/swapops.h>
> #include <linux/memcontrol.h>
> +#include <linux/pagecache_acct.h>
>
> #include "internal.h"
>
> @@ -70,6 +71,8 @@ struct scan_control {
>
> struct container *container; /* Used by containers for reclaiming */
> /* pages when the limit is exceeded */
> + int reclaim_pagecache_only; /* Set when called from
> + pagecache controller */
> };
>
> /*
> @@ -474,6 +477,15 @@ static unsigned long shrink_page_list(st
> goto keep;
>
> VM_BUG_ON(PageActive(page));
> + /* Take it easy if we are doing only pagecache pages */
> + if (sc->reclaim_pagecache_only) {
> + /* Check if this is a pagecache page they are not mapped */
> + if (page_mapped(page))
> + goto keep_locked;
> + /* Check if this container has exceeded pagecache limit */
> + if (!pagecache_acct_page_overlimit(page))
> + goto keep_locked;
> + }
>
> sc->nr_scanned++;
>
> @@ -522,7 +534,8 @@ static unsigned long shrink_page_list(st
> }
>
> if (PageDirty(page)) {
> - if (referenced)
> + /* Reclaim even referenced pagecache pages if over limit */
> + if (!pagecache_acct_page_overlimit(page) && referenced)
> goto keep_locked;
> if (!may_enter_fs)
> goto keep_locked;
> @@ -869,6 +882,13 @@ force_reclaim_mapped:
> cond_resched();
> page = lru_to_page(&l_hold);
> list_del(&page->lru);
> + /* While reclaiming pagecache make it easy */
> + if (sc->reclaim_pagecache_only) {
> + if (page_mapped(page) || !pagecache_acct_page_overlimit(page)) {
> + list_add(&page->lru, &l_active);
> + continue;
> + }
> + }
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Here, if page type is mapped or not overlimit, why add it back to active list?
Did shrink_page_list() is called by shrink_inactive_list()?
-Aubrey
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists