linux-kernel - Re: [patch 3/8] mm: vmscan: save work scanning (almost) empty LRU lists

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

Message-ID: <20121213104104.GX1009@suse.de>
Date:	Thu, 13 Dec 2012 10:41:04 +0000
From:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
To:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 3/8] mm: vmscan: save work scanning (almost) empty LRU
 lists

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 04:43:35PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> In certain cases (kswapd reclaim, memcg target reclaim), a fixed
> minimum amount of pages is scanned from the LRU lists on each
> iteration, to make progress.
> 
> Do not make this minimum bigger than the respective LRU list size,
> however, and save some busy work trying to isolate and reclaim pages
> that are not there.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>

This looks like a corner case where the LRU size would have to be smaller
than SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX. Is that common enough to care? It looks correct,
I'm just curious.

Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
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/