Hi Andrew > > and, It is judged out of trouble at the fllowing situations. > > o memory pressure decrease and stop moves an anonymous page to the > > inactive list. > > o free pages increase than (pages_high+lowmem_reserve)*2. > > This seems rather arbitrary. Why choose this stage in the page > reclaimation process rather than some other stage? > > If this feature is useful then I'd expect that some applications would want > notification at different times, or at different levels of VM distress. So > this semi-randomly-chosen notification point just won't be strong enough in > real-world use. Hmmm actually, This portion become code broat through some bug reports. Yes, I think it again and implement it more simplefy. Thanks! > Does this change work correctly and appropriately for processes which are > running in a cgroup memory controller? nice point out. to be honest, I don't think at mem-cgroup until now. I will implement it at next post. > Given the amount of code which these patches add, and the subsequent > maintenance burden, and the unlikelihood of getting many applications to > actually _use_ the interface, it is not obvious to me that inclusion in the > kernel is justifiable, sorry. OK. I'll implement it again more simplefy. Thanks. > memory_pressure_notify() is far too large to be inlined. OK. I will fix it. > Some of the patches were wordwrapped. Agghh.. I will don't use gmail at next post. sorry. and, I hope merge only poll_wait_exclusive() and wake_up_locked_nr() if you don't mind. this 2 portion anybody noclaim about 2 month. and I think it is useful function by many people. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
