Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] buffer: cleanup free_more_memory() flusher wakeup
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, clm@fb.com
References: <1505850787-18311-1-git-send-email-axboe@kernel.dk>
 <1505850787-18311-2-git-send-email-axboe@kernel.dk>
 <20170920141727.GB11106@quack2.suse.cz>
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Message-ID: <cd7a0ac4-7cc7-41b3-1712-69226256ef36@kernel.dk>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 09:18:47 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170920141727.GB11106@quack2.suse.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 895
Lines: 24

On 09/20/2017 08:17 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 19-09-17 13:53:02, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> This whole function is... interesting. Change the wakeup call
>> to the flusher threads to pass in nr_pages == 0, instead of
>> some random number of pages. This matches more closely what
>> similar cases do for memory shortage/reclaim.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
> 
> Ok, probably makes sense. You can add:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> 
> BTW, after this nobody seems to use the number of pages for
> wakeup_flusher_threads() so can you just delete the argument for the
> function? After all system-wide wakeup is useful only for system wide
> sync(2) or memory reclaim so number of pages isn't very useful...

Great observation! That's true, and if we kill that, it enables
further cleanups down the line for patch 5 and 6. I have
incorporated that.

-- 
Jens Axboe