[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210921111630.GR3959@techsingularity.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2021 12:16:30 +0100
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
Cc: Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
"Darrick J . Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] mm/vmscan: Throttle reclaim when no progress is
being made
On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 09:31:30AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Sep 2021, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > +
> > + reclaim_throttle(pgdat, VMSCAN_THROTTLE_NOPROGRESS, HZ/10);
>
> We always seem to pass "HZ/10" to reclaim_throttle(). Should we just
> hard-code that in the one place inside reclaim_throttle() itself?
>
do_writepages passes in HZ/50. I'm not sure if these values even have
any special meaning, I think it's more likely they were pulled out of
the air based on the speed of some disk in the past and then copied.
It's another reason why I want the wakeups to be based on events within
the mm as much as possible.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists