[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190827135322.GG7538@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 15:53:22 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>
Cc: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>,
Adric Blake <promarbler14@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: WARNINGs in set_task_reclaim_state with memory
cgroupandfullmemory usage
On Tue 27-08-19 21:29:24, Hillf Danton wrote:
>
> >> No preference seems in either way except for retaining
> >> nr_to_reclaim == SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX and target_mem_cgroup == memcg.
> >
> > Setting target_mem_cgroup here may be a very subtle change for
> > subsequent processing.
> > Regarding retraining nr_to_reclaim == SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX, it may not
> > proper for direct reclaim, that may cause some stall if we iterate all
> > memcgs here.
>
> Mind posting a RFC to collect thoughts?
I hope I have explained why this is not desirable
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190827120335.GA7538@dhcp22.suse.cz
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists