On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:28:22AM -0700, Ying Han wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 03:47:43PM -0700, Ying Han wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:25 PM, Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> >>
> >> > Once the per-memcg lru lists are exclusive, the unevictable page
> >> > rescue scanner can no longer work on the global zone lru lists.
> >> >
> >> > This converts it to go through all memcgs and scan their respective
> >> > unevictable lists instead.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> > ---
> >> > include/linux/memcontrol.h | 2 +
> >> > mm/memcontrol.c | 11 +++++++++
> >> > mm/vmscan.c | 53
> >> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> >> > 3 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> >> > index cb02c00..56c1def 100644
> >> > --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> >> > +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> >> > @@ -60,6 +60,8 @@ extern void mem_cgroup_cancel_charge_swapin(struct
> >> > mem_cgroup *ptr);
> >> >
> >> > extern int mem_cgroup_cache_charge(struct page *page, struct mm_struct
> >> > *mm,
> >> > gfp_t gfp_mask);
> >> > +struct page *mem_cgroup_lru_to_page(struct zone *, struct mem_cgroup *,
> >> > + enum lru_list);
> >> >
> >>
> >> Did we miss a #ifdef case for this function? I got compile error by
> >> disabling memcg.
> >
> > I assume it's because the call to it is not optimized away properly in
> > the disabled case. I'll have it fixed in the next round, thanks for
> > letting me know.
> >
>
> Hi Johannes:
>
> This is the change for the hierarchy_walk() sent on the other patch,
> also including a fix. Please consider to fold in your patch:
>
> Fix the hierarchy_walk() in the unevictable page rescue scanner
>
> the patch including changes
> 1. adjust the change in hierarchy_walk() which needs to hold the reference to
> the first mem_cgroup.
> 2. add stop_hierarchy_walk() at the end which is missed on the original patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ying Han <yinghan@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Change-Id: I72fb5d351faf0f111c8c99edd90b6cfee6281d3f
> ---
> mm/memcontrol.c | 3 +++
> mm/vmscan.c | 7 ++++---
> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> index 9bcd429..426092b 100644
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> @@ -1514,6 +1514,9 @@ void mem_cgroup_stop_hierarchy_walk(struct
> mem_cgroup *target,
> >------>------->------->------- struct mem_cgroup *first,
> >------>------->------->------- struct mem_cgroup *mem)
> {
> +>------if (!target)
> +>------>-------target = root_mem_cgroup;
This is important and I have it already in my tree.
After the changes to the iteration process as explained in my previous
email, I don't think the rest of this patch is necessary. Can you
confirm? Thanks!
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>