Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762032AbYBULH1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 06:07:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1765600AbYBULGp (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 06:06:45 -0500 Received: from E23SMTP01.au.ibm.com ([202.81.18.162]:39398 "EHLO e23smtp01.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1765576AbYBULGo (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Feb 2008 06:06:44 -0500 Message-ID: <47BD5A31.9070401@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:32:09 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Organization: IBM User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071115) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: KOSAKI Motohiro CC: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Rik van Riel , Lee Schermerhorn , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] the proposal of improve page reclaim by throttle References: <20080219134715.7E90.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> <47BD48F3.3040903@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <2f11576a0802210301sb162ac9u6cf4ba4d5cb179b4@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <2f11576a0802210301sb162ac9u6cf4ba4d5cb179b4@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1467 Lines: 41 KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > Hi balbir-san > >> It's good to keep the main reclaim code and the memory controller reclaim in >> sync, so this is a nice effort. > > thank you. > I will repost next version (fixed nick's opinion) while a few days. > >> > @@ -1456,7 +1501,7 @@ unsigned long try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pag >> > int target_zone = gfp_zone(GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE); >> > >> > zones = NODE_DATA(numa_node_id())->node_zonelists[target_zone].zones; >> > - if (do_try_to_free_pages(zones, sc.gfp_mask, &sc)) >> > + if (try_to_free_pages_throttled(zones, 0, sc.gfp_mask, &sc)) >> > return 1; >> > return 0; >> > } >> >> try_to_free_pages_throttled checks for zone_watermark_ok(), that will not work >> in the case that we are reclaiming from a cgroup which over it's limit. We need >> a different check, to see if the mem_cgroup is still over it's limit or not. > > That makes sense. > > unfortunately, I don't know mem-cgroup so much. > What do i use function, instead? One option could be that once the memory controller has this feature, we'll need no changes in try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages. -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/