On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 12:08 PM osalvador <osalvador@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 08:57:32AM -0700, Yang Shi wrote: > > IMHO, we don't have to modify those two places at all. They are used > > to rebalance the anon lru active/inactive ratio even if we did not try > > to evict anon pages at all, so "total_swap_pages" is used instead of > > checking swappiness and available swap space. > > > > The changes may result in imbalanced anon lru. > > I might be missing something, so bear with me. > > It is true that since we are only rebalancing the lists, we do not need to > check for swap space yet, but here we are also adding a new end-point where we > can migrate to in case of memory pressure. > > So in case we can demote pages, it makes sense to proceed with the aging > and rebalancing regardless of whether we have swap in place, right? Yes, makes sense. I missed that point. > > But maybe the right procedure would be to perform some sort of the > following check in those two places: > > if (total_swap_pages || can_migrate_to_demote_node) > - proceed_with_rebalancing_or_aging Looks sane to me. > > -- > Oscar Salvador > SUSE L3
