[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090211215654.C3D6.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 21:58:59 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: MinChan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
William Lee Irwin III <wli@...ementarian.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] shrink_all_memory() use sc.nr_reclaimed
> Hmm, I think old bale-out code is right.
> In shrink_all_memory, As more reclaiming with pass progressing,
> the smaller nr_to_scan is. The nr_to_scan is the number of page shrinking which
> user want.
> The shrink_all_zones have to reclaim nr_to_scan's page by doing best effort.
> So, If you use accumulation of reclaim, it can break bale-out in shrink_all_zones.
you are right. thanks.
shrink_all_zones()'s nr_pages != shrink_all_memory()'s nr_pages.
(I don't like this misleading variable name scheme ;)
> I mean here.
>
> '
> NR_LRU_BASE + l));
> ret += shrink_list(l, nr_to_scan, zone,
> sc, prio);
> if (ret >= nr_pages)
> return ret;
> }
> '
>
> I have to make patch again so that it will keep on old bale-out behavior.
Sure.
thanks.
--
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