All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Jia He <hejianet@gmail.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] mm: remove seemingly spurious reclaimability check from laptop_mode gating
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 16:06:21 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170301150620.GC11730@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170228214007.5621-4-hannes@cmpxchg.org>

On Tue 28-02-17 16:40:01, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> 1d82de618ddd ("mm, vmscan: make kswapd reclaim in terms of nodes")
> allowed laptop_mode=1 to start writing not just when the priority
> drops to DEF_PRIORITY - 2 but also when the node is unreclaimable.
> That appears to be a spurious change in this patch as I doubt the
> series was tested with laptop_mode, and neither is that particular
> change mentioned in the changelog. Remove it, it's still recent.

The less pgdat_reclaimable we have the better IMHO. If this is really
needed then I would appreciate a proper explanation because each such
a heuristic is just a head scratcher - especially after few years when
all the details are long forgotten.

> Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>

Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>

> ---
>  mm/vmscan.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index f006140f58c6..911957b66622 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -3288,7 +3288,7 @@ static int balance_pgdat(pg_data_t *pgdat, int order, int classzone_idx)
>  		 * If we're getting trouble reclaiming, start doing writepage
>  		 * even in laptop mode.
>  		 */
> -		if (sc.priority < DEF_PRIORITY - 2 || !pgdat_reclaimable(pgdat))
> +		if (sc.priority < DEF_PRIORITY - 2)
>  			sc.may_writepage = 1;
>  
>  		/* Call soft limit reclaim before calling shrink_node. */
> -- 
> 2.11.1

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Jia He <hejianet@gmail.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] mm: remove seemingly spurious reclaimability check from laptop_mode gating
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 16:06:21 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170301150620.GC11730@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170228214007.5621-4-hannes@cmpxchg.org>

On Tue 28-02-17 16:40:01, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> 1d82de618ddd ("mm, vmscan: make kswapd reclaim in terms of nodes")
> allowed laptop_mode=1 to start writing not just when the priority
> drops to DEF_PRIORITY - 2 but also when the node is unreclaimable.
> That appears to be a spurious change in this patch as I doubt the
> series was tested with laptop_mode, and neither is that particular
> change mentioned in the changelog. Remove it, it's still recent.

The less pgdat_reclaimable we have the better IMHO. If this is really
needed then I would appreciate a proper explanation because each such
a heuristic is just a head scratcher - especially after few years when
all the details are long forgotten.

> Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>

Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>

> ---
>  mm/vmscan.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index f006140f58c6..911957b66622 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -3288,7 +3288,7 @@ static int balance_pgdat(pg_data_t *pgdat, int order, int classzone_idx)
>  		 * If we're getting trouble reclaiming, start doing writepage
>  		 * even in laptop mode.
>  		 */
> -		if (sc.priority < DEF_PRIORITY - 2 || !pgdat_reclaimable(pgdat))
> +		if (sc.priority < DEF_PRIORITY - 2)
>  			sc.may_writepage = 1;
>  
>  		/* Call soft limit reclaim before calling shrink_node. */
> -- 
> 2.11.1

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2017-03-01 15:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 80+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-02-28 21:39 [PATCH 0/9] mm: kswapd spinning on unreclaimable nodes - fixes and cleanups Johannes Weiner
2017-02-28 21:39 ` Johannes Weiner
2017-02-28 21:39 ` [PATCH 1/9] mm: fix 100% CPU kswapd busyloop on unreclaimable nodes Johannes Weiner
2017-02-28 21:39   ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-02  3:23   ` Hillf Danton
2017-03-02  3:23     ` Hillf Danton
2017-03-02 23:30   ` Shakeel Butt
2017-03-02 23:30     ` Shakeel Butt
2017-03-03  1:26   ` Minchan Kim
2017-03-03  1:26     ` Minchan Kim
2017-03-03  7:59     ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-03  7:59       ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-06  1:37       ` Minchan Kim
2017-03-06  1:37         ` Minchan Kim
2017-03-06 16:24         ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-06 16:24           ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-07  0:59           ` Hillf Danton
2017-03-07  0:59             ` Hillf Danton
2017-03-07  7:28           ` Minchan Kim
2017-03-07  7:28             ` Minchan Kim
2017-03-07 10:17           ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-07 10:17             ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-07 16:56             ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-07 16:56               ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-09 14:20               ` Mel Gorman
2017-03-09 14:20                 ` Mel Gorman
2017-02-28 21:40 ` [PATCH 2/9] mm: fix check for reclaimable pages in PF_MEMALLOC reclaim throttling Johannes Weiner
2017-02-28 21:40   ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-01 15:02   ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-01 15:02     ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-02  3:25   ` Hillf Danton
2017-03-02  3:25     ` Hillf Danton
2017-02-28 21:40 ` [PATCH 3/9] mm: remove seemingly spurious reclaimability check from laptop_mode gating Johannes Weiner
2017-02-28 21:40   ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-01 15:06   ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2017-03-01 15:06     ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-01 15:17   ` Mel Gorman
2017-03-01 15:17     ` Mel Gorman
2017-03-02  3:27   ` Hillf Danton
2017-03-02  3:27     ` Hillf Danton
2017-02-28 21:40 ` [PATCH 4/9] mm: remove unnecessary reclaimability check from NUMA balancing target Johannes Weiner
2017-02-28 21:40   ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-01 15:14   ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-01 15:14     ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-02  3:28   ` Hillf Danton
2017-03-02  3:28     ` Hillf Danton
2017-02-28 21:40 ` [PATCH 5/9] mm: don't avoid high-priority reclaim on unreclaimable nodes Johannes Weiner
2017-02-28 21:40   ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-01 15:21   ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-01 15:21     ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-02  3:31   ` Hillf Danton
2017-03-02  3:31     ` Hillf Danton
2017-02-28 21:40 ` [PATCH 6/9] mm: don't avoid high-priority reclaim on memcg limit reclaim Johannes Weiner
2017-02-28 21:40   ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-01 15:40   ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-01 15:40     ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-01 17:36     ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-01 17:36       ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-01 19:13       ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-01 19:13         ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-02  3:32   ` Hillf Danton
2017-03-02  3:32     ` Hillf Danton
2017-02-28 21:40 ` [PATCH 7/9] mm: delete NR_PAGES_SCANNED and pgdat_reclaimable() Johannes Weiner
2017-02-28 21:40   ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-01 15:41   ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-01 15:41     ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-02  3:34   ` Hillf Danton
2017-03-02  3:34     ` Hillf Danton
2017-02-28 21:40 ` [PATCH 8/9] Revert "mm, vmscan: account for skipped pages as a partial scan" Johannes Weiner
2017-02-28 21:40   ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-01 15:51   ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-01 15:51     ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-02  3:36   ` Hillf Danton
2017-03-02  3:36     ` Hillf Danton
2017-02-28 21:40 ` [PATCH 9/9] mm: remove unnecessary back-off function when retrying page reclaim Johannes Weiner
2017-02-28 21:40   ` Johannes Weiner
2017-03-01 14:56   ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-01 14:56     ` Michal Hocko
2017-03-02  3:37   ` Hillf Danton
2017-03-02  3:37     ` Hillf Danton

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=20170301150620.GC11730@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=hejianet@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.