On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 02:48:45PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: >[Cc Tim - the patch is http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220308012047.26638-3-richard.weiyang@xxxxxxxxx] > >On Wed 09-03-22 00:46:20, Wei Yang wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 09:17:58AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: >> >On Tue 08-03-22 01:20:47, Wei Yang wrote: >> >> next_mz is removed from rb_tree, let's add it back if no reclaim has >> >> been tried. >> > >> >Could you elaborate more why we need/want this? >> > >> >> Per my understanding, we add back the right most node even reclaim makes no >> progress, so it is reasonable to add back a node if we didn't get a chance to >> do reclaim on it. > >Your patch sounded familiar and I can remember now. The same fix has >been posted by Tim last year >https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/8d35206601ccf0e1fe021d24405b2a0c2f4e052f.1613584277.git.tim.c.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ >It was posted with other changes to the soft limit code which I didn't >like but I have acked this particular one. Not sure what has happened >with it afterwards. Because of this ? 4f09feb8bf: vm-scalability.throughput -4.3% regression https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20210302062521.GB23892@xsang-OptiPlex-9020/ >-- >Michal Hocko >SUSE Labs -- Wei Yang Help you, Help me
