From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752563AbaAMXLg (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jan 2014 18:11:36 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:53291 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751388AbaAMXLd (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jan 2014 18:11:33 -0500 Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 15:11:32 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Vladimir Davydov Cc: , , , Mel Gorman , Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , Rik van Riel , Dave Chinner , Glauber Costa Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] mm: vmscan: respect NUMA policy mask when shrinking slab on direct reclaim Message-Id: <20140113151132.d07cbc938baf5af70f929120@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: <7d37542211678a637dc6b4d995fd6f1e89100538.1389443272.git.vdavydov@parallels.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.2.0beta5 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 16:36:33 +0400 Vladimir Davydov wrote: > When direct reclaim is executed by a process bound to a set of NUMA > nodes, we should scan only those nodes when possible, but currently we > will scan kmem from all online nodes even if the kmem shrinker is NUMA > aware. That said, binding a process to a particular NUMA node won't > prevent it from shrinking inode/dentry caches from other nodes, which is > not good. Fix this. Seems right. I worry that reducing the amount of shrinking which node-bound processes perform might affect workloads in unexpected ways. I think I'll save this one for 3.15-rc1, OK?