The patch titled
Subject: mm: vmscan: simplify lruvec_lru_size()
has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
mm-vmscan-simplify-lruvec_lru_size.patch
This patch should soon appear at
http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/mm-vmscan-simplify-lruvec_lru_size.patch
and later at
http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/mm-vmscan-simplify-lruvec_lru_size.patch
Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
*** Remember to use Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst when testing your code ***
The -mm tree is included into linux-next and is updated
there every 3-4 working days
------------------------------------------------------
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: mm: vmscan: simplify lruvec_lru_size()
Patch series "mm: vmscan: cgroup-related cleanups".
Here are 8 patches that clean up the reclaim code's interaction with
cgroups a bit. They're not supposed to change any behavior, just make
the implementation easier to understand and work with.
This patch (of 8):
This function currently takes the node or lruvec size and subtracts the
zones that are excluded by the classzone index of the allocation. It uses
four different types of counters to do this.
Just add up the eligible zones.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20191022144803.302233-2-hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@xxxxxx>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
mm/vmscan.c | 21 +++++----------------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
--- a/mm/vmscan.c~mm-vmscan-simplify-lruvec_lru_size
+++ a/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -351,32 +351,21 @@ unsigned long zone_reclaimable_pages(str
*/
unsigned long lruvec_lru_size(struct lruvec *lruvec, enum lru_list lru, int zone_idx)
{
- unsigned long lru_size = 0;
+ unsigned long size = 0;
int zid;
- if (!mem_cgroup_disabled()) {
- for (zid = 0; zid < MAX_NR_ZONES; zid++)
- lru_size += mem_cgroup_get_zone_lru_size(lruvec, lru, zid);
- } else
- lru_size = node_page_state(lruvec_pgdat(lruvec), NR_LRU_BASE + lru);
-
- for (zid = zone_idx + 1; zid < MAX_NR_ZONES; zid++) {
+ for (zid = 0; zid <= zone_idx; zid++) {
struct zone *zone = &lruvec_pgdat(lruvec)->node_zones[zid];
- unsigned long size;
if (!managed_zone(zone))
continue;
if (!mem_cgroup_disabled())
- size = mem_cgroup_get_zone_lru_size(lruvec, lru, zid);
+ size += mem_cgroup_get_zone_lru_size(lruvec, lru, zid);
else
- size = zone_page_state(&lruvec_pgdat(lruvec)->node_zones[zid],
- NR_ZONE_LRU_BASE + lru);
- lru_size -= min(size, lru_size);
+ size += zone_page_state(zone, NR_ZONE_LRU_BASE + lru);
}
-
- return lru_size;
-
+ return size;
}
/*
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx are
mm-rate-limit-allocation-failure-warnings-more-aggressively.patch
mm-memcontrol-fix-network-errors-from-failing-__gfp_atomic-charges.patch
mm-memcontrol-remove-dead-code-from-memory_max_write.patch
mm-memcontrol-try-harder-to-set-a-new-memoryhigh.patch
mm-drop-mmap_sem-before-calling-balance_dirty_pages-in-write-fault.patch
mm-vmscan-simplify-lruvec_lru_size.patch
mm-clean-up-and-clarify-lruvec-lookup-procedure.patch
mm-vmscan-move-inactive_list_is_low-swap-check-to-the-caller.patch
mm-vmscan-naming-fixes-global_reclaim-and-sane_reclaim.patch
mm-vmscan-replace-shrink_node-loop-with-a-retry-jump.patch
mm-vmscan-turn-shrink_node_memcg-into-shrink_lruvec.patch
mm-vmscan-split-shrink_node-into-node-part-and-memcgs-part.patch
mm-vmscan-split-shrink_node-into-node-part-and-memcgs-part-fix.patch
mm-vmscan-harmonize-writeback-congestion-tracking-for-nodes-memcgs.patch
