On Fri 22-07-16 11:43:30, Zhou Chengming wrote:
> In !global_reclaim(sc) case, we should update sc->nr_reclaimed after each
> shrink_slab in the loop. Because we need the correct sc->nr_reclaimed
> value to see if we can break out.
Does this actually change anything? Maybe I am missing something but
try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages which is the main entry for the memcg
reclaim doesn't set reclaim_state. I don't remember why... Vladimir?
Have you observed any issues and this patch fixes it or this is just
motivated by the code inspection?
> Signed-off-by: Zhou Chengming <zhouchengming1@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 5 +++++
> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index c4a2f45..47133c3 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -2405,6 +2405,11 @@ static bool shrink_zone(struct zone *zone, struct scan_control *sc,
> memcg, sc->nr_scanned - scanned,
> lru_pages);
>
> + if (!global_reclaim(sc) && reclaim_state) {
> + sc->nr_reclaimed += reclaim_state->reclaimed_slab;
> + reclaim_state->reclaimed_slab = 0;
> + }
> +
> /* Record the group's reclaim efficiency */
> vmpressure(sc->gfp_mask, memcg, false,
> sc->nr_scanned - scanned,
> --
> 1.7.7
>
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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>