Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754422Ab0DDOT3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Apr 2010 10:19:29 -0400 Received: from fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.36]:52912 "EHLO fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753753Ab0DDOTX (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Apr 2010 10:19:23 -0400 Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 23:19:06 +0900 (JST) X-SecurityPolicyCheck-FJ: OK by FujitsuOutboundMailChecker v1.3.1 From: KOSAKI Motohiro To: Shaohua Li Subject: Re: [PATCH]vmscan: handle underflow for get_scan_ratio Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "Wu, Fengguang" In-Reply-To: <20100402092441.GA21100@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> References: <20100402181307.6470.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100402092441.GA21100@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> Message-Id: <20100404231558.7E00.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.50.07 [ja] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1448 Lines: 33 > On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 05:14:38PM +0800, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > > > > This patch makes a lot of sense than previous. however I think <1% anon ratio > > > > > shouldn't happen anyway because file lru doesn't have reclaimable pages. > > > > > <1% seems no good reclaim rate. > > > > > > > > Oops, the above mention is wrong. sorry. only 1 page is still too big. > > > > because under streaming io workload, the number of scanning anon pages should > > > > be zero. this is very strong requirement. if not, backup operation will makes > > > > a lot of swapping out. > > > Sounds there is no big impact for the workload which you mentioned with the patch. > > > please see below descriptions. > > > I updated the description of the patch as fengguang suggested. > > > > Umm.. sorry, no. > > > > "one fix but introduce another one bug" is not good deal. instead, > > I'll revert the guilty commit at first as akpm mentioned. > Even we revert the commit, the patch still has its benefit, as it increases > calculation precision, right? no, you shouldn't ignore the regression case. If we can remove the streaming io corner case by another patch, this patch can be considered to merge. thanks. -- 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/