[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <afd96793-549d-94eb-607c-6a785788397a@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 12:51:10 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com,
Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "mm/vmscan: never demote for memcg reclaim"
On 5/18/22 12:09, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> However, with NUMA balancing now doing tier promotions, demotion is
> part of the page aging process. Global reclaim demotes the coldest
> toptier pages to secondary memory, where their life continues and from
> which they have a chance to get promoted back. Essentially, tiered
> memory systems have an LRU order that spans multiple nodes.
Thanks for the detailed explanation. Ultimately, this was just intended
as an optimization to make cgroup reclaim more efficient. But, I agree
that ordering correctness should trump efficiency.
Acked-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists