Re: [PATCH v2] fix get_scan_count for working well with small targets

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:50:31 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 13:59:34 -0700
> Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > What about simply removing the nr_saved_scan logic and permitting small
> > scans?  That simplifies the code and I bet it makes no measurable
> > performance difference.
> > 
> 
> ok, v2 here. How this looks ?
> For memcg, I think I should add select_victim_node() for direct reclaim,
> then, we'll be tune big memcg using small memory on a zone case.
> 


Ah, sorry this v2 doesn't remove nr_saved_scan in reclaim_stat. ...
I will send v3.

--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]