On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 02:06:13PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 06/14/2010 07:17 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
>> From: KOSAKI Motohiro<kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Now, max_scan of shrink_inactive_list() is always passed less than
>> SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX. then, we can remove scanning pages loop in it.
>> This patch also help stack diet.
>>
>> detail
>> - remove "while (nr_scanned< max_scan)" loop
>> - remove nr_freed (now, we use nr_reclaimed directly)
>> - remove nr_scan (now, we use nr_scanned directly)
>> - rename max_scan to nr_to_scan
>> - pass nr_to_scan into isolate_pages() directly instead
>> using SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX
>>
>> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro<kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Reviewed-by: Johannes Weiner<hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Other than the weird whitespace below,
>
Not sure where this came out of. It's not in my local patch file nor in
my working tree. Very odd.
> Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
Thanks
>> + /*
>> + * If we are direct reclaiming for contiguous pages and we do
>> + * not reclaim everything in the list, try again and wait
>> + * for IO to complete. This will stall high-order allocations
>> + * but that should be acceptable to the caller
>> + */
>> + if (nr_reclaimed< nr_taken&& !current_is_kswapd()&& sc->lumpy_reclaim_mode) {
>> + congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10);
>
> --
> All rights reversed
>
--
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>