On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 12:11:05PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > >From 0a0358d300330a4ba86e39ea56ed63f1e4519dfd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 10:31:16 +0900 > Subject: [PATCH 4/5] fix wrong check of noswap with softlimit > > Hierarchical reclaim doesn't swap out if memsw and resource limits are > same (memsw_is_minimum == true) because we would hit mem+swap limit > anyway (during hard limit reclaim). > If it comes to the solft limit we shouldn't consider memsw_is_minimum at > all because it doesn't make much sense. Either the soft limit is bellow > the hard limit and then we cannot hit mem+swap limit or the direct > reclaim takes a precedence. > > Reviewed-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx> > Acked-by: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <jweiner@xxxxxxxxxx> -- 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>