From: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> To: linux-mm@kvack.org Cc: Alex Shi <alexs@kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Benjamin Manes <ben.manes@gmail.com>, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>, Michael Larabel <michael@michaellarabel.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Michel Lespinasse <michel@lespinasse.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>, Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>, Rong Chen <rong.a.chen@intel.com>, SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.de>, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>, Ying Huang <ying.huang@intel.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lkp@lists.01.org, page-reclaim@google.com, Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> Subject: [PATCH v2 07/16] mm/vmscan.c: refactor shrink_node() Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 00:56:24 -0600 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20210413065633.2782273-8-yuzhao@google.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210413065633.2782273-1-yuzhao@google.com> Heuristics that determine scan balance between anon and file LRUs are rather independent. Move them into a separate function to improve readability. Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> --- mm/vmscan.c | 186 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- 1 file changed, 98 insertions(+), 88 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c index 562e87cbd7a1..1a24d2e0a4cb 100644 --- a/mm/vmscan.c +++ b/mm/vmscan.c @@ -2224,6 +2224,103 @@ enum scan_balance { SCAN_FILE, }; +static void prepare_scan_count(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) +{ + unsigned long file; + struct lruvec *target_lruvec; + + target_lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(sc->target_mem_cgroup, pgdat); + + /* + * Determine the scan balance between anon and file LRUs. + */ + spin_lock_irq(&target_lruvec->lru_lock); + sc->anon_cost = target_lruvec->anon_cost; + sc->file_cost = target_lruvec->file_cost; + spin_unlock_irq(&target_lruvec->lru_lock); + + /* + * Target desirable inactive:active list ratios for the anon + * and file LRU lists. + */ + if (!sc->force_deactivate) { + unsigned long refaults; + + refaults = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec, + WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE_ANON); + if (refaults != target_lruvec->refaults[0] || + inactive_is_low(target_lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_ANON)) + sc->may_deactivate |= DEACTIVATE_ANON; + else + sc->may_deactivate &= ~DEACTIVATE_ANON; + + /* + * When refaults are being observed, it means a new + * workingset is being established. Deactivate to get + * rid of any stale active pages quickly. + */ + refaults = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec, + WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE_FILE); + if (refaults != target_lruvec->refaults[1] || + inactive_is_low(target_lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_FILE)) + sc->may_deactivate |= DEACTIVATE_FILE; + else + sc->may_deactivate &= ~DEACTIVATE_FILE; + } else + sc->may_deactivate = DEACTIVATE_ANON | DEACTIVATE_FILE; + + /* + * If we have plenty of inactive file pages that aren't + * thrashing, try to reclaim those first before touching + * anonymous pages. + */ + file = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec, NR_INACTIVE_FILE); + if (file >> sc->priority && !(sc->may_deactivate & DEACTIVATE_FILE)) + sc->cache_trim_mode = 1; + else + sc->cache_trim_mode = 0; + + /* + * Prevent the reclaimer from falling into the cache trap: as + * cache pages start out inactive, every cache fault will tip + * the scan balance towards the file LRU. And as the file LRU + * shrinks, so does the window for rotation from references. + * This means we have a runaway feedback loop where a tiny + * thrashing file LRU becomes infinitely more attractive than + * anon pages. Try to detect this based on file LRU size. + */ + if (!cgroup_reclaim(sc)) { + unsigned long total_high_wmark = 0; + unsigned long free, anon; + int z; + + free = sum_zone_node_page_state(pgdat->node_id, NR_FREE_PAGES); + file = node_page_state(pgdat, NR_ACTIVE_FILE) + + node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_FILE); + + for (z = 0; z < MAX_NR_ZONES; z++) { + struct zone *zone = &pgdat->node_zones[z]; + + if (!managed_zone(zone)) + continue; + + total_high_wmark += high_wmark_pages(zone); + } + + /* + * Consider anon: if that's low too, this isn't a + * runaway file reclaim problem, but rather just + * extreme pressure. Reclaim as per usual then. + */ + anon = node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_ANON); + + sc->file_is_tiny = + file + free <= total_high_wmark && + !(sc->may_deactivate & DEACTIVATE_ANON) && + anon >> sc->priority; + } +} + /* * Determine how aggressively the anon and file LRU lists should be * scanned. The relative value of each set of LRU lists is determined @@ -2669,7 +2766,6 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) unsigned long nr_reclaimed, nr_scanned; struct lruvec *target_lruvec; bool reclaimable = false; - unsigned long file; target_lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(sc->target_mem_cgroup, pgdat); @@ -2679,93 +2775,7 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) nr_reclaimed = sc->nr_reclaimed; nr_scanned = sc->nr_scanned; - /* - * Determine the scan balance between anon and file LRUs. - */ - spin_lock_irq(&target_lruvec->lru_lock); - sc->anon_cost = target_lruvec->anon_cost; - sc->file_cost = target_lruvec->file_cost; - spin_unlock_irq(&target_lruvec->lru_lock); - - /* - * Target desirable inactive:active list ratios for the anon - * and file LRU lists. - */ - if (!sc->force_deactivate) { - unsigned long refaults; - - refaults = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec, - WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE_ANON); - if (refaults != target_lruvec->refaults[0] || - inactive_is_low(target_lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_ANON)) - sc->may_deactivate |= DEACTIVATE_ANON; - else - sc->may_deactivate &= ~DEACTIVATE_ANON; - - /* - * When refaults are being observed, it means a new - * workingset is being established. Deactivate to get - * rid of any stale active pages quickly. - */ - refaults = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec, - WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE_FILE); - if (refaults != target_lruvec->refaults[1] || - inactive_is_low(target_lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_FILE)) - sc->may_deactivate |= DEACTIVATE_FILE; - else - sc->may_deactivate &= ~DEACTIVATE_FILE; - } else - sc->may_deactivate = DEACTIVATE_ANON | DEACTIVATE_FILE; - - /* - * If we have plenty of inactive file pages that aren't - * thrashing, try to reclaim those first before touching - * anonymous pages. - */ - file = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec, NR_INACTIVE_FILE); - if (file >> sc->priority && !(sc->may_deactivate & DEACTIVATE_FILE)) - sc->cache_trim_mode = 1; - else - sc->cache_trim_mode = 0; - - /* - * Prevent the reclaimer from falling into the cache trap: as - * cache pages start out inactive, every cache fault will tip - * the scan balance towards the file LRU. And as the file LRU - * shrinks, so does the window for rotation from references. - * This means we have a runaway feedback loop where a tiny - * thrashing file LRU becomes infinitely more attractive than - * anon pages. Try to detect this based on file LRU size. - */ - if (!cgroup_reclaim(sc)) { - unsigned long total_high_wmark = 0; - unsigned long free, anon; - int z; - - free = sum_zone_node_page_state(pgdat->node_id, NR_FREE_PAGES); - file = node_page_state(pgdat, NR_ACTIVE_FILE) + - node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_FILE); - - for (z = 0; z < MAX_NR_ZONES; z++) { - struct zone *zone = &pgdat->node_zones[z]; - if (!managed_zone(zone)) - continue; - - total_high_wmark += high_wmark_pages(zone); - } - - /* - * Consider anon: if that's low too, this isn't a - * runaway file reclaim problem, but rather just - * extreme pressure. Reclaim as per usual then. - */ - anon = node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_ANON); - - sc->file_is_tiny = - file + free <= total_high_wmark && - !(sc->may_deactivate & DEACTIVATE_ANON) && - anon >> sc->priority; - } + prepare_scan_count(pgdat, sc); shrink_node_memcgs(pgdat, sc); -- 2.31.1.295.g9ea45b61b8-goog
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> To: lkp@lists.01.org Subject: [PATCH v2 07/16] mm/vmscan.c: refactor shrink_node() Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 00:56:24 -0600 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20210413065633.2782273-8-yuzhao@google.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210413065633.2782273-1-yuzhao@google.com> [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7292 bytes --] Heuristics that determine scan balance between anon and file LRUs are rather independent. Move them into a separate function to improve readability. Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> --- mm/vmscan.c | 186 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- 1 file changed, 98 insertions(+), 88 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c index 562e87cbd7a1..1a24d2e0a4cb 100644 --- a/mm/vmscan.c +++ b/mm/vmscan.c @@ -2224,6 +2224,103 @@ enum scan_balance { SCAN_FILE, }; +static void prepare_scan_count(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) +{ + unsigned long file; + struct lruvec *target_lruvec; + + target_lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(sc->target_mem_cgroup, pgdat); + + /* + * Determine the scan balance between anon and file LRUs. + */ + spin_lock_irq(&target_lruvec->lru_lock); + sc->anon_cost = target_lruvec->anon_cost; + sc->file_cost = target_lruvec->file_cost; + spin_unlock_irq(&target_lruvec->lru_lock); + + /* + * Target desirable inactive:active list ratios for the anon + * and file LRU lists. + */ + if (!sc->force_deactivate) { + unsigned long refaults; + + refaults = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec, + WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE_ANON); + if (refaults != target_lruvec->refaults[0] || + inactive_is_low(target_lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_ANON)) + sc->may_deactivate |= DEACTIVATE_ANON; + else + sc->may_deactivate &= ~DEACTIVATE_ANON; + + /* + * When refaults are being observed, it means a new + * workingset is being established. Deactivate to get + * rid of any stale active pages quickly. + */ + refaults = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec, + WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE_FILE); + if (refaults != target_lruvec->refaults[1] || + inactive_is_low(target_lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_FILE)) + sc->may_deactivate |= DEACTIVATE_FILE; + else + sc->may_deactivate &= ~DEACTIVATE_FILE; + } else + sc->may_deactivate = DEACTIVATE_ANON | DEACTIVATE_FILE; + + /* + * If we have plenty of inactive file pages that aren't + * thrashing, try to reclaim those first before touching + * anonymous pages. + */ + file = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec, NR_INACTIVE_FILE); + if (file >> sc->priority && !(sc->may_deactivate & DEACTIVATE_FILE)) + sc->cache_trim_mode = 1; + else + sc->cache_trim_mode = 0; + + /* + * Prevent the reclaimer from falling into the cache trap: as + * cache pages start out inactive, every cache fault will tip + * the scan balance towards the file LRU. And as the file LRU + * shrinks, so does the window for rotation from references. + * This means we have a runaway feedback loop where a tiny + * thrashing file LRU becomes infinitely more attractive than + * anon pages. Try to detect this based on file LRU size. + */ + if (!cgroup_reclaim(sc)) { + unsigned long total_high_wmark = 0; + unsigned long free, anon; + int z; + + free = sum_zone_node_page_state(pgdat->node_id, NR_FREE_PAGES); + file = node_page_state(pgdat, NR_ACTIVE_FILE) + + node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_FILE); + + for (z = 0; z < MAX_NR_ZONES; z++) { + struct zone *zone = &pgdat->node_zones[z]; + + if (!managed_zone(zone)) + continue; + + total_high_wmark += high_wmark_pages(zone); + } + + /* + * Consider anon: if that's low too, this isn't a + * runaway file reclaim problem, but rather just + * extreme pressure. Reclaim as per usual then. + */ + anon = node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_ANON); + + sc->file_is_tiny = + file + free <= total_high_wmark && + !(sc->may_deactivate & DEACTIVATE_ANON) && + anon >> sc->priority; + } +} + /* * Determine how aggressively the anon and file LRU lists should be * scanned. The relative value of each set of LRU lists is determined @@ -2669,7 +2766,6 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) unsigned long nr_reclaimed, nr_scanned; struct lruvec *target_lruvec; bool reclaimable = false; - unsigned long file; target_lruvec = mem_cgroup_lruvec(sc->target_mem_cgroup, pgdat); @@ -2679,93 +2775,7 @@ static void shrink_node(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct scan_control *sc) nr_reclaimed = sc->nr_reclaimed; nr_scanned = sc->nr_scanned; - /* - * Determine the scan balance between anon and file LRUs. - */ - spin_lock_irq(&target_lruvec->lru_lock); - sc->anon_cost = target_lruvec->anon_cost; - sc->file_cost = target_lruvec->file_cost; - spin_unlock_irq(&target_lruvec->lru_lock); - - /* - * Target desirable inactive:active list ratios for the anon - * and file LRU lists. - */ - if (!sc->force_deactivate) { - unsigned long refaults; - - refaults = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec, - WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE_ANON); - if (refaults != target_lruvec->refaults[0] || - inactive_is_low(target_lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_ANON)) - sc->may_deactivate |= DEACTIVATE_ANON; - else - sc->may_deactivate &= ~DEACTIVATE_ANON; - - /* - * When refaults are being observed, it means a new - * workingset is being established. Deactivate to get - * rid of any stale active pages quickly. - */ - refaults = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec, - WORKINGSET_ACTIVATE_FILE); - if (refaults != target_lruvec->refaults[1] || - inactive_is_low(target_lruvec, LRU_INACTIVE_FILE)) - sc->may_deactivate |= DEACTIVATE_FILE; - else - sc->may_deactivate &= ~DEACTIVATE_FILE; - } else - sc->may_deactivate = DEACTIVATE_ANON | DEACTIVATE_FILE; - - /* - * If we have plenty of inactive file pages that aren't - * thrashing, try to reclaim those first before touching - * anonymous pages. - */ - file = lruvec_page_state(target_lruvec, NR_INACTIVE_FILE); - if (file >> sc->priority && !(sc->may_deactivate & DEACTIVATE_FILE)) - sc->cache_trim_mode = 1; - else - sc->cache_trim_mode = 0; - - /* - * Prevent the reclaimer from falling into the cache trap: as - * cache pages start out inactive, every cache fault will tip - * the scan balance towards the file LRU. And as the file LRU - * shrinks, so does the window for rotation from references. - * This means we have a runaway feedback loop where a tiny - * thrashing file LRU becomes infinitely more attractive than - * anon pages. Try to detect this based on file LRU size. - */ - if (!cgroup_reclaim(sc)) { - unsigned long total_high_wmark = 0; - unsigned long free, anon; - int z; - - free = sum_zone_node_page_state(pgdat->node_id, NR_FREE_PAGES); - file = node_page_state(pgdat, NR_ACTIVE_FILE) + - node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_FILE); - - for (z = 0; z < MAX_NR_ZONES; z++) { - struct zone *zone = &pgdat->node_zones[z]; - if (!managed_zone(zone)) - continue; - - total_high_wmark += high_wmark_pages(zone); - } - - /* - * Consider anon: if that's low too, this isn't a - * runaway file reclaim problem, but rather just - * extreme pressure. Reclaim as per usual then. - */ - anon = node_page_state(pgdat, NR_INACTIVE_ANON); - - sc->file_is_tiny = - file + free <= total_high_wmark && - !(sc->may_deactivate & DEACTIVATE_ANON) && - anon >> sc->priority; - } + prepare_scan_count(pgdat, sc); shrink_node_memcgs(pgdat, sc); -- 2.31.1.295.g9ea45b61b8-goog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-13 6:57 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 164+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-04-13 6:56 [PATCH v2 00/16] Multigenerational LRU Framework Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 01/16] include/linux/memcontrol.h: do not warn in page_memcg_rcu() if !CONFIG_MEMCG Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 02/16] include/linux/nodemask.h: define next_memory_node() if !CONFIG_NUMA Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 03/16] include/linux/huge_mm.h: define is_huge_zero_pmd() if !CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 04/16] include/linux/cgroup.h: export cgroup_mutex Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 05/16] mm/swap.c: export activate_page() Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 06/16] mm, x86: support the access bit on non-leaf PMD entries Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao [this message] 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 07/16] mm/vmscan.c: refactor shrink_node() Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 08/16] mm: multigenerational lru: groundwork Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 09/16] mm: multigenerational lru: activation Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 10/16] mm: multigenerational lru: mm_struct list Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 14:36 ` Matthew Wilcox 2021-04-14 14:36 ` Matthew Wilcox 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 11/16] mm: multigenerational lru: aging Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 12/16] mm: multigenerational lru: eviction Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 13/16] mm: multigenerational lru: page reclaim Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 14/16] mm: multigenerational lru: user interface Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 22:39 ` kernel test robot 2021-04-13 22:39 ` kernel test robot 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 15/16] mm: multigenerational lru: Kconfig Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 16:19 ` kernel test robot 2021-04-13 16:19 ` kernel test robot 2021-04-14 4:54 ` kernel test robot 2021-04-14 4:54 ` kernel test robot 2021-04-13 6:56 ` [PATCH v2 16/16] mm: multigenerational lru: documentation Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 6:56 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-13 7:51 ` [PATCH v2 00/16] Multigenerational LRU Framework SeongJae Park 2021-04-13 7:51 ` SeongJae Park 2021-04-13 16:13 ` Jens Axboe 2021-04-13 16:13 ` Jens Axboe 2021-04-13 16:42 ` SeongJae Park 2021-04-13 16:42 ` SeongJae Park 2021-04-13 23:14 ` Dave Chinner 2021-04-13 23:14 ` Dave Chinner 2021-04-14 2:29 ` Rik van Riel 2021-04-14 2:29 ` Rik van Riel 2021-04-14 2:29 ` Rik van Riel 2021-04-14 4:13 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 4:13 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 6:15 ` Huang, Ying 2021-04-14 6:15 ` Huang, Ying 2021-04-14 6:15 ` Huang, Ying 2021-04-14 7:58 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 7:58 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 7:58 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 8:27 ` Huang, Ying 2021-04-14 8:27 ` Huang, Ying 2021-04-14 8:27 ` Huang, Ying 2021-04-14 13:51 ` Rik van Riel 2021-04-14 13:51 ` Rik van Riel 2021-04-14 13:51 ` Rik van Riel 2021-04-14 15:56 ` Andi Kleen 2021-04-14 15:56 ` Andi Kleen 2021-04-14 15:58 ` [page-reclaim] " Shakeel Butt 2021-04-14 15:58 ` Shakeel Butt 2021-04-14 15:58 ` Shakeel Butt 2021-04-14 18:45 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 18:45 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 18:45 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 15:51 ` Andi Kleen 2021-04-14 15:51 ` Andi Kleen 2021-04-14 15:58 ` Rik van Riel 2021-04-14 15:58 ` Rik van Riel 2021-04-14 15:58 ` Rik van Riel 2021-04-14 19:14 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 19:14 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 19:14 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 19:41 ` Rik van Riel 2021-04-14 19:41 ` Rik van Riel 2021-04-14 19:41 ` Rik van Riel 2021-04-14 20:08 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 20:08 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 20:08 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 19:04 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 19:04 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 19:04 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-15 3:00 ` Andi Kleen 2021-04-15 3:00 ` Andi Kleen 2021-04-15 7:13 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-15 7:13 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-15 7:13 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-15 8:19 ` Huang, Ying 2021-04-15 8:19 ` Huang, Ying 2021-04-15 8:19 ` Huang, Ying 2021-04-15 9:57 ` Michel Lespinasse 2021-04-18 6:48 ` Michel Lespinasse 2021-04-24 2:33 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-24 2:33 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-24 2:33 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-24 3:30 ` Andi Kleen 2021-04-24 3:30 ` Andi Kleen 2021-04-24 4:16 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-24 4:16 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-24 4:16 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 3:40 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 3:40 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 3:40 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 4:50 ` Dave Chinner 2021-04-14 4:50 ` Dave Chinner 2021-04-14 7:16 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 7:16 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 7:16 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 10:00 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 10:00 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-15 1:36 ` Dave Chinner 2021-04-15 1:36 ` Dave Chinner 2021-04-24 21:21 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-24 21:21 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-24 21:21 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 14:43 ` Jens Axboe 2021-04-14 14:43 ` Jens Axboe 2021-04-14 19:42 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 19:42 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-14 19:42 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-15 1:21 ` Dave Chinner 2021-04-15 1:21 ` Dave Chinner 2021-04-14 17:43 ` Johannes Weiner 2021-04-14 17:43 ` Johannes Weiner 2021-04-27 10:35 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-27 10:35 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-27 10:35 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-29 23:46 ` Konstantin Kharlamov 2021-04-29 23:46 ` Konstantin Kharlamov 2021-04-29 23:46 ` Konstantin Kharlamov 2021-04-30 6:37 ` Konstantin Kharlamov 2021-04-30 6:37 ` Konstantin Kharlamov 2021-04-30 6:37 ` Konstantin Kharlamov 2021-04-30 19:31 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-30 19:31 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-30 19:31 ` Yu Zhao 2021-04-29 6:34 [PATCH v2 07/16] mm/vmscan.c: refactor shrink_node() Chien Nguyenmau
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=20210413065633.2782273-8-yuzhao@google.com \ --to=yuzhao@google.com \ --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \ --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=alexs@kernel.org \ --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \ --cc=ben.manes@gmail.com \ --cc=corbet@lwn.net \ --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \ --cc=david@fromorbit.com \ --cc=guro@fb.com \ --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \ --cc=hdanton@sina.com \ --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \ --cc=linmiaohe@huawei.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=lkp@lists.01.org \ --cc=mgorman@suse.de \ --cc=mhocko@suse.com \ --cc=michael@michaellarabel.com \ --cc=michel@lespinasse.org \ --cc=page-reclaim@google.com \ --cc=riel@surriel.com \ --cc=rong.a.chen@intel.com \ --cc=shy828301@gmail.com \ --cc=sjpark@amazon.de \ --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \ --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \ --cc=willy@infradead.org \ --cc=ying.huang@intel.com \ --cc=ziy@nvidia.com \ /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: linkBe 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.