On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:47:13 +0300 Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Inode cache pruning indirectly reclaims page-cache by invalidating mapping pages. > Let's account them into reclaim-state to notice this progress in memory reclaimer. > > Signed-off-by: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/inode.c | 2 ++ > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c > index ee4e66b..1f6c48d 100644 > --- a/fs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/inode.c > @@ -692,6 +692,8 @@ void prune_icache_sb(struct super_block *sb, int nr_to_scan) > else > __count_vm_events(PGINODESTEAL, reap); > spin_unlock(&sb->s_inode_lru_lock); > + if (current->reclaim_state) > + current->reclaim_state->reclaimed_slab += reap; > > dispose_list(&freeable); > } hm, yes, I suppose we should. It seems to be cheating to use the "reclaimed_slab" field for this. Perhaps it would be cleaner to add an additional field to reclaim_state for non-slab pages which were also reclaimed. That's a cosmetic thing and I guess we don't need to go that far, not sure... -- 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>