On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 10:20:31PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-06-06 at 15:48 -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > When the splitlru patches divided page cache and swap-backed pages
> > into separate LRU lists, the pressure balance between the lists was
> > biased to account for the fact that streaming IO can cause memory
> > pressure with a flood of pages that are used only once. New page
> > cache
> > additions would tip the balance toward the file LRU, and repeat
> > access
> > would neutralize that bias again. This ensured that page reclaim
> > would
> > always go for used-once cache first.
> >
> > Since e9868505987a ("mm,vmscan: only evict file pages when we have
> > plenty"), page reclaim generally skips over swap-backed memory
> > entirely as long as there is used-once cache present, and will apply
> > the LRU balancing when only repeatedly accessed cache pages are left
> > -
> > at which point the previous use-once bias will have been neutralized.
> >
> > This makes the use-once cache balancing bias unnecessary. Remove it.
> >
>
> The code in get_scan_count() still seems to use the statistics
> of which you just removed the updating.
>
> What am I overlooking?
As I mentioned in 5/10, page reclaim still does updates for each
scanned page and rotated page at this point in the series.
This merely removes the pre-reclaim bias for cache.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>