On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:18:32AM +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:
> > + if (!(sc->gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> it appears __GFP_WAIT allocation doesn't go to direct reclaim.
Good point! So we are returning to its very first version ;)
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -1135,6 +1135,7 @@ static int too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone, int file,
struct scan_control *sc)
{
unsigned long inactive, isolated;
+ int ratio;
if (current_is_kswapd())
return 0;
@@ -1150,7 +1151,9 @@ static int too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone, int file,
isolated = zone_page_state(zone, NR_ISOLATED_ANON);
}
- return isolated > inactive;
+ ratio = sc->gfp_mask & (__GFP_IO | __GFP_FS) ? 1 : 8;
+
+ return isolated > inactive * ratio;
}
/*
--
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>