Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1590827
| From | "Hillf Danton" <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 6/9] mm: don't avoid high-priority reclaim on memcg limit reclaim |
| Date | 2017-03-02 04:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tgpKV-4Fz-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tfZQt-2Vc-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <tg7l0-8hz-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On March 01, 2017 5:40 AM Johannes Weiner wrote:
>
> 246e87a93934 ("memcg: fix get_scan_count() for small targets") sought
> to avoid high reclaim priorities for memcg by forcing it to scan a
> minimum amount of pages when lru_pages >> priority yielded nothing.
> This was done at a time when reclaim decisions like dirty throttling
> were tied to the priority level.
>
> Nowadays, the only meaningful thing still tied to priority dropping
> below DEF_PRIORITY - 2 is gating whether laptop_mode=1 is generally
> allowed to write. But that is from an era where direct reclaim was
> still allowed to call ->writepage, and kswapd nowadays avoids writes
> until it's scanned every clean page in the system. Potential changes
> to how quick sc->may_writepage could trigger are of little concern.
>
> Remove the force_scan stuff, as well as the ugly multi-pass target
> calculation that it necessitated.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> ---
Acked-by: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 6/9] mm: don't avoid high-priority reclaim on memcg limit reclaim Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> - 2017-03-01 09:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 6/9] mm: don't avoid high-priority reclaim on memcg limit reclaim Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-03-01 17:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 6/9] mm: don't avoid high-priority reclaim on memcg limit reclaim Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> - 2017-03-01 19:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH 6/9] mm: don't avoid high-priority reclaim on memcg limit reclaim Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-03-01 20:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 6/9] mm: don't avoid high-priority reclaim on memcg limit reclaim "Hillf Danton" <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com> - 2017-03-02 04:40 +0100
csiph-web