[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190520225747.GC10039@google.com>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 07:57:47 +0900
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Tim Murray <timmurray@...gle.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...gle.com>,
Brian Geffon <bgeffon@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/7] mm: change PAGEREF_RECLAIM_CLEAN with PAGE_REFRECLAIM
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 12:50:13PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 12:52:49PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > The local variable references in shrink_page_list is PAGEREF_RECLAIM_CLEAN
> > as default. It is for preventing to reclaim dirty pages when CMA try to
> > migrate pages. Strictly speaking, we don't need it because CMA didn't allow
> > to write out by .may_writepage = 0 in reclaim_clean_pages_from_list.
> >
> > Moreover, it has a problem to prevent anonymous pages's swap out even
> > though force_reclaim = true in shrink_page_list on upcoming patch.
> > So this patch makes references's default value to PAGEREF_RECLAIM and
> > rename force_reclaim with skip_reference_check to make it more clear.
> >
> > This is a preparatory work for next patch.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
>
> Looks good to me, just one nit below.
>
> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Thanks, Johannes.
>
> > ---
> > mm/vmscan.c | 6 +++---
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> > index d9c3e873eca6..a28e5d17b495 100644
> > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > @@ -1102,7 +1102,7 @@ static unsigned long shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list,
> > struct scan_control *sc,
> > enum ttu_flags ttu_flags,
> > struct reclaim_stat *stat,
> > - bool force_reclaim)
> > + bool skip_reference_check)
>
> "ignore_references" would be better IMO
Sure.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists