On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 7:13 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro
<kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> If number of reclaimable slabs are zero, shrink_icache_memory() and
> shrink_dcache_memory() return 0. but strangely shrink_slab() ignore
> it and continue meaningless loop iteration.
>
> This patch fixes it.
>
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 5 +++++
> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 0f9f624..8f61adb 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -243,6 +243,11 @@ unsigned long shrink_slab(unsigned long scanned, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> int nr_before;
>
> nr_before = (*shrinker->shrink)(0, gfp_mask);
> + /* no slab objects, no more reclaim. */
> + if (nr_before == 0) {
> + total_scan = 0;
Why do you reset totoal_scan to 0?
I don't know exact meaning of shrinker->nr.
AFAIU, it can affect next shrinker's total_scan.
Isn't it harmful?
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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