Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932360Ab0KOAur (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Nov 2010 19:50:47 -0500 Received: from fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.37]:57643 "EHLO fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757139Ab0KOAup (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Nov 2010 19:50:45 -0500 X-SecurityPolicyCheck-FJ: OK by FujitsuOutboundMailChecker v1.3.1 From: KOSAKI Motohiro To: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [patch] mm: vmscan implement per-zone shrinkers Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Nick Piggin , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: <20101114182614.BEE5.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20101109123246.GA11477@amd> <20101114182614.BEE5.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-Id: <20101115092452.BEF1.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] Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:50:36 +0900 (JST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1968 Lines: 65 > > @@ -1835,8 +1978,6 @@ static void shrink_zone(int priority, st > > break; > > } > > > > - sc->nr_reclaimed = nr_reclaimed; > > - > > /* > > * Even if we did not try to evict anon pages at all, we want to > > * rebalance the anon lru active/inactive ratio. > > @@ -1844,6 +1985,23 @@ static void shrink_zone(int priority, st > > if (inactive_anon_is_low(zone, sc)) > > shrink_active_list(SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX, zone, sc, priority, 0); > > > > + /* > > + * Don't shrink slabs when reclaiming memory from > > + * over limit cgroups > > + */ > > + if (sc->may_reclaim_slab) { > > + struct reclaim_state *reclaim_state = current->reclaim_state; > > + > > + shrink_slab(zone, sc->nr_scanned - nr_scanned, > > Doubtful calculation. What mean "sc->nr_scanned - nr_scanned"? > I think nr_scanned simply keep old slab balancing behavior. And per-zone reclaim can lead to new issue. On 32bit highmem system, theorically the system has following memory usage. ZONE_HIGHMEM: 100% used for page cache ZONE_NORMAL: 100% used for slab So, traditional page-cache/slab balancing may not work. I think following new calculation or somethinhg else is necessary. if (zone_reclaimable_pages() > NR_SLAB_RECLAIMABLE) { using current calculation } else { shrink number of "objects >> reclaim-priority" objects (as page cache scanning calculation) } However, it can be separate this patch, perhaps. > > > > + lru_pages, global_lru_pages, sc->gfp_mask); > > + if (reclaim_state) { > > + nr_reclaimed += reclaim_state->reclaimed_slab; > > + reclaim_state->reclaimed_slab = 0; > > + } > > + } > > + > > + sc->nr_reclaimed = nr_reclaimed; > > + > > throttle_vm_writeout(sc->gfp_mask); > > } -- 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/