From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755728Ab1ISNqK (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2011 09:46:10 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:36790 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750920Ab1ISNqI (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2011 09:46:08 -0400 Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 15:46:06 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Johannes Weiner Cc: Andrew Morton , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Daisuke Nishimura , Balbir Singh , Ying Han , Greg Thelen , Michel Lespinasse , Rik van Riel , Minchan Kim , Christoph Hellwig , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 02/11] mm: vmscan: distinguish global reclaim from global LRU scanning Message-ID: <20110919134606.GF21847@tiehlicka.suse.cz> References: <1315825048-3437-1-git-send-email-jweiner@redhat.com> <1315825048-3437-3-git-send-email-jweiner@redhat.com> <20110919132344.GE21847@tiehlicka.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110919132344.GE21847@tiehlicka.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon 19-09-11 15:23:44, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 12-09-11 12:57:19, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > The traditional zone reclaim code is scanning the per-zone LRU lists > > during direct reclaim and kswapd, and the per-zone per-memory cgroup > > LRU lists when reclaiming on behalf of a memory cgroup limit. > > > > Subsequent patches will convert the traditional reclaim code to > > reclaim exclusively from the per-memory cgroup LRU lists. As a > > result, using the predicate for which LRU list is scanned will no > > longer be appropriate to tell global reclaim from limit reclaim. > > > > This patch adds a global_reclaim() predicate to tell direct/kswapd > > reclaim from memory cgroup limit reclaim and substitutes it in all > > places where currently scanning_global_lru() is used for that. > > I am wondering about vmscan_swappiness. Shouldn't it use global_reclaim > instead? Ahh, it looks like the next patch does that. Wouldn't it make more sense to have that change here? I see that this makes the patch smaller but... -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs SUSE LINUX s.r.o. Lihovarska 1060/12 190 00 Praha 9 Czech Republic