[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160616102904.GH1868@techsingularity.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 11:29:04 +0100
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/27] mm, vmscan: Clear congestion, dirty and need for
compaction on a per-node basis
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:29:00AM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 06/09/2016 08:04 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >Congested and dirty tracking of a node and whether reclaim should stall
> >is still based on zone activity. This patch considers whether the kernel
> >should stall based on node-based reclaim activity.
>
> I'm a bit confused about the description vs actual code.
> It appears to move some duplicated code to a related function, which is
> fine. The rest of callsites that didn't perform the clearing before
> (prepare_kswapd_sleep() and wakeup_kswapd()) might be a bit overkill, but
> won't hurt. But I don't see the part "considers whether the kernel
> should stall based on node-based reclaim activity". Is something missing?
>
Tired when writing the changelog. Does this make more sense?
mm, vmscan: Remove duplicate logic clearing node congestion and dirty state
Reclaim may stall if there is too much dirty or congested data on a node.
This was previously based on zone flags and the logic for clearing the
flags is in two places. As congestion/dirty tracking is now tracked on
a per-node basis, we can remove some duplicate logic.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists