linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: remove zone->prev

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 12 Feb 2009 09:00:43 +0900
From:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	MinChan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, riel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: remove zone->prev_prioriy

On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:23:39 +0900 (JST)
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> wrote:

> > On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:06:46 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > > On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 19:57:01 +0900
> > > > MinChan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > As you know, prev_priority is used as a measure of how much stress page reclaim.
> > > > > But now we doesn't need it due to split-lru's way.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think it would be better to remain why prev_priority isn't needed any more
> > > > > and how split-lru can replace prev_priority's role in changelog.
> > > > > 
> > > > > In future, it help mm newbies understand change history, I think.
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, I'd be fascinated to see that explanation.
> > > > 
> > > > In http://groups.google.pn/group/linux.kernel/browse_thread/thread/fea9c9a0b43162a1
> > > > it was asserted that we intend to use prev_priority again in the future.
> > > > 
> > > > We discussed this back in November:
> > > > http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0811.2/index.html#00001
> > > > 
> > > > And I think that I still think that the VM got worse due to its (new)
> > > > failure to track previous state.  IIRC, the response to that concern
> > > > was quite similar to handwavy waffling.
> > > 
> > > Yes.
> > > I still think it's valuable code.
> > > I think, In theory, VM sould take parallel reclaim bonus.
> > 
> > prev_priority had nothing to do with concurrent reclaim?
> > 
> > It was there so that when a task enters direct reclaim against a zone,
> > it will immediately adopt the state which the task which most recently
> > ran direct reclaim had.
> > 
> > Without this feature, each time a task enters direct reclaim it will need
> > to "relearn" that state - ramping up, making probably-incorrect
> > decisions as it does so.
> 
> Yes, I perfectly agree to you.
> theorically, prev_priority is very valuable stuff.
> 

Ok, please implement the lost logic again.

-Kame

--
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/