[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20111117162322.1c3e3d05.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 16:23:22 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: account reaped page cache on inode cache pruning
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:47:13 +0300
Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org> wrote:
> Inode cache pruning indirectly reclaims page-cache by invalidating mapping pages.
> Let's account them into reclaim-state to notice this progress in memory reclaimer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>
> ---
> fs/inode.c | 2 ++
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
> index ee4e66b..1f6c48d 100644
> --- a/fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/inode.c
> @@ -692,6 +692,8 @@ void prune_icache_sb(struct super_block *sb, int nr_to_scan)
> else
> __count_vm_events(PGINODESTEAL, reap);
> spin_unlock(&sb->s_inode_lru_lock);
> + if (current->reclaim_state)
> + current->reclaim_state->reclaimed_slab += reap;
>
> dispose_list(&freeable);
> }
hm, yes, I suppose we should.
It seems to be cheating to use the "reclaimed_slab" field for this.
Perhaps it would be cleaner to add an additional field to reclaim_state
for non-slab pages which were also reclaimed. That's a cosmetic thing
and I guess we don't need to go that far, not sure...
--
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