From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753356AbXC0Ilk (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 04:41:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753366AbXC0Ilk (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 04:41:40 -0400 Received: from ik-out-1112.google.com ([66.249.90.179]:4579 "EHLO ik-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753356AbXC0Ilj (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 04:41:39 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=eTtUNAgnXePQ6pAUWFg0aUrA0n6YZJ02b1eqqLXwnQAzUVIk0fONIaolPPSFOV2pNyQ+arMdDMNspo6ApI1QlMfGIP+2c3CFFDx86jr16Pe9CV2Kv6qheFNaA87lYC+FK2y6bWbzViEqzbpDkPV8ziri9kEgb/RR9Tt3etvBzcs= Message-ID: <6d6a94c50703270141u5e59f73dj8bef0de0cfed1924@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:41:33 +0800 From: "Aubrey Li" To: "Vaidyanathan Srinivasan" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3][RFC] Containers: Pagecache controller reclaim Cc: "Linux Kernel" , linux-mm@kvack.org, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, "Balbir Singh" , "Srivatsa Vaddagiri" , devel@openvz.org, xemul@sw.ru, "Paul Menage" , "Christoph Lameter" , "Rik van Riel" In-Reply-To: <4608C4F6.4020407@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <45ED251C.2010400@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <45ED266E.7040107@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <6d6a94c50703262044q22e94538i5e79a32a82f7c926@mail.gmail.com> <4608C4F6.4020407@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 3/27/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: > Correct, shrink_page_list() is called from shrink_inactive_list() but > the above code is patched in shrink_active_list(). The > 'force_reclaim_mapped' label is from function shrink_active_list() and > not in shrink_page_list() as it may seem in the patch file. > > While removing pages from active_list, we want to select only > pagecache pages and leave the remaining in the active_list. > page_mapped() pages are _not_ of interest to pagecache controller > (they will be taken care by rss controller) and hence we put it back. > Also if the pagecache controller is below limit, no need to reclaim > so we put back all pages and come out. Oh, I just read the patch, not apply it to my local tree, I'm working on 2.6.19 now. So the question is, when vfs pagecache limit is hit, the current implementation just reclaim few pages, so it's quite possible the limit is hit again, and hence the reclaim code will be called again and again, that will impact application performance. -Aubrey From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id s2so1790532uge for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 01:41:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6d6a94c50703270141u5e59f73dj8bef0de0cfed1924@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:41:33 +0800 From: "Aubrey Li" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3][RFC] Containers: Pagecache controller reclaim In-Reply-To: <4608C4F6.4020407@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <45ED251C.2010400@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <45ED266E.7040107@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <6d6a94c50703262044q22e94538i5e79a32a82f7c926@mail.gmail.com> <4608C4F6.4020407@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan Cc: Linux Kernel , linux-mm@kvack.org, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, Balbir Singh , Srivatsa Vaddagiri , devel@openvz.org, xemul@sw.ru, Paul Menage , Christoph Lameter , Rik van Riel List-ID: On 3/27/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: > Correct, shrink_page_list() is called from shrink_inactive_list() but > the above code is patched in shrink_active_list(). The > 'force_reclaim_mapped' label is from function shrink_active_list() and > not in shrink_page_list() as it may seem in the patch file. > > While removing pages from active_list, we want to select only > pagecache pages and leave the remaining in the active_list. > page_mapped() pages are _not_ of interest to pagecache controller > (they will be taken care by rss controller) and hence we put it back. > Also if the pagecache controller is below limit, no need to reclaim > so we put back all pages and come out. Oh, I just read the patch, not apply it to my local tree, I'm working on 2.6.19 now. So the question is, when vfs pagecache limit is hit, the current implementation just reclaim few pages, so it's quite possible the limit is hit again, and hence the reclaim code will be called again and again, that will impact application performance. -Aubrey -- 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: email@kvack.org