[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b966ccc578ac60d3684cff0c88c1b9046b408ea3.camel@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 13:51:10 +0100
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
Cc: Alexey Avramov <hakavlad@...ox.lv>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Darrick Wong <djwong@...nel.org>, regressions@...ts.linux.dev,
Linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: vmscan: Reduce throttling due to a failure to
make progress
On Tue, 2021-11-30 at 13:00 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2021-11-30 at 11:22 +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 11:14:32AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > > }
> > > > + if (2 * write_pending <= reclaimable)
> > >
> > > That is always true here...
> > >
> >
> > Always true for you or always true in general?
>
> "Here" as in the boxen located at my GPS coordinates :)
>
> > The intent of the check is "are a majority of reclaimable pages
> > marked WRITE_PENDING?". It's similar to the check that existed prior
> > to 132b0d21d21f ("mm/page_alloc: remove the throttling logic from the
> > page allocator").
>
> I'll put my trace_printk() back and see if I can't bend-adjust it.
As it sits, write_pending is always 0 with tail /dev/zero.
-Mike
Powered by blists - more mailing lists