[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251215211754.GG905277@cmpxchg.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2025 16:17:54 -0500
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To: Chen Ridong <chenridong@...weicloud.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, axelrasmussen@...gle.com, yuanchu@...gle.com,
weixugc@...gle.com, david@...nel.org, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com,
Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, vbabka@...e.cz, rppt@...nel.org,
surenb@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com, corbet@....net,
roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, shakeel.butt@...ux.dev,
muchun.song@...ux.dev, zhengqi.arch@...edance.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
lujialin4@...wei.com, zhongjinji@...or.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 4/5] mm/mglru: combine shrink_many into
shrink_node_memcgs
On Tue, Dec 09, 2025 at 01:25:56AM +0000, Chen Ridong wrote:
> @@ -5822,6 +5779,12 @@ static void shrink_node_memcgs(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc)
>
> shrink_one(lruvec, sc);
>
> + if (should_abort_scan(lruvec, sc)) {
Can you please rename this and add the jump label check?
if (lru_gen_enabled() && lru_gen_should_abort_scan())
The majority of the checks in there already happen inside
shrink_node_memcgs() itself. Factoring those out is probably better in
another patch, but no need to burden classic LRU in the meantime.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists