[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 14:35:10 -0800
From: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>
To: "T.J. Mercier" <tjmercier@...gle.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Efly Young <yangyifei03@...ishou.com>, android-mm@...gle.com, yuzhao@...gle.com,
mkoutny@...e.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: memcg: Use larger batches for proactive reclaim
> > > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > > index 46d8d02114cf..e6f921555e07 100644
> > > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> > > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > > @@ -6965,6 +6965,9 @@ static ssize_t memory_reclaim(struct kernfs_open_file *of, char *buf,
> > > while (nr_reclaimed < nr_to_reclaim) {
> > > unsigned long reclaimed;
> > >
> > > + /* Will converge on zero, but reclaim enforces a minimum */
> > > + unsigned long batch_size = (nr_to_reclaim - nr_reclaimed) / 4;
> > > +
I think it's clearer with no blank lines between declarations. Perhaps
add these two lines right above the declaration of "reclaimed"?
> > > if (signal_pending(current))
> > > return -EINTR;
> > >
> > > @@ -6977,7 +6980,7 @@ static ssize_t memory_reclaim(struct kernfs_open_file *of, char *buf,
> > > lru_add_drain_all();
> > >
> > > reclaimed = try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages(memcg,
> > > - min(nr_to_reclaim - nr_reclaimed, SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX),
> > > + batch_size,
> > > GFP_KERNEL, reclaim_options);
> >
> > I think the above two lines should now fit into one.
>
> It goes out to 81 characters. I wasn't brave enough, even though the
> 80 char limit is no more. :)
Oh okay, I would leave it as-is or rename batch_size to something
slightly shorter. Not a big deal either way. Going to 81 chars is
probably fine too.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists