From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>, Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Dennis Zhou <dennis@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"cgroups@vger.kernel.org" <cgroups@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Proportional memory.{low,min} reclaim
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 13:24:59 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190716172459.GB16575@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190715153527.86a3f6e65ecf5d501252dbf1@linux-foundation.org>
On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 03:35:27PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 21:52:40 +0000 Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com> wrote:
>
> > > Hmm, this isn't really a common situation that I'd thought about, but it
> > > seems reasonable to make the boundaries when in low reclaim to be between
> > > min and low, rather than 0 and low. I'll add another patch with that. Thanks
> >
> > It's not a stopper, so I'm perfectly fine with a follow-up patch.
>
> Did this happen?
>
> I'm still trying to get this five month old patchset unstuck :(. The
> review status is:
>
> [1/3] mm, memcg: proportional memory.{low,min} reclaim
> Acked-by: Johannes
> Reviewed-by: Roman
>
> [2/3] mm, memcg: make memory.emin the baseline for utilisation determination
> Acked-by: Johannes
>
> [3/3] mm, memcg: make scan aggression always exclude protection
> Reviewed-by: Roman
I forgot to send out the actual ack-tag on #, so I just did. I was
involved in the discussions that led to that patch, the code looks
good to me, and it's what we've been using internally for a while
without any hiccups.
> I do have a note here that mhocko intended to take a closer look but I
> don't recall whether that happened.
Michal acked #3 in 20190530065111.GC6703@dhcp22.suse.cz. Afaik not the
others, but #3 also doesn't make a whole lot of sense without #1...
> a) say what the hell and merge them or
> b) sit on them for another cycle or
> c) drop them and ask Chris for a resend so we can start again.
Michal, would you have time to take another look this week? Otherwise,
I think everyone who would review them has done so.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-16 17:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-24 1:44 [PATCH] mm: Proportional memory.{low,min} reclaim Chris Down
2019-01-28 21:00 ` Roman Gushchin
2019-01-28 21:42 ` Chris Down
2019-01-28 21:52 ` Roman Gushchin
2019-07-15 22:35 ` Andrew Morton
2019-07-15 22:57 ` Chris Down
2019-07-16 17:24 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2019-09-26 11:49 ` Michal Hocko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190716172459.GB16575@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=Kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chris@chrisdown.name \
--cc=dennis@kernel.org \
--cc=guro@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).