[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181025202707.GL25444@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 13:27:07 -0700
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: don't reclaim inodes with many attached pages
On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 04:20:14PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 12:44:42PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Yup. Sasha, can you please take care of this?
>
> Sure, I'll revert it from current stable trees.
>
> Should 172b06c32b94 and this commit be backported once Roman confirms
> the issue is fixed? As far as I understand 172b06c32b94 addressed an
> issue FB were seeing in their fleet and needed to be fixed.
I'm not sure I see "FB sees an issue in their fleet" and "needs to be
fixed in stable kernels" as related. FB's workload is different from
most people's workloads and FB has a large and highly-skilled team of
kernel engineers. Obviously I want this problem fixed in mainline,
but I don't know that most people benefit from having it fixed in stable.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists