From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754122Ab0IMArF (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Sep 2010 20:47:05 -0400 Received: from mail-iw0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]:37810 "EHLO mail-iw0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753666Ab0IMArD convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Sep 2010 20:47:03 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=vE8aHSVuRm30xEB++i3lDerUTkjwVoMFqiLAtMcDA9clzplEhcYvwt8PdLQz95aumu S1o3MnGL848ItVaSt0T8AN5dXrdbTtd9B9OMDU6xBHw9h9+VpBph0Nvs22Ryl0u48w2S 9VMuSz5ji1lFZKYDtpd7IadElIA49TDq4Ywmc= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201009121942.53543.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <20100912163200.GA4098@barrios-desktop> <201009121942.53543.rjw@sisk.pl> Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 09:47:02 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vmscan: check all_unreclaimable in direct reclaim path From: Minchan Kim To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm , LKML , KOSAKI Motohiro , Johannes Weiner , Rik van Riel , "M. Vefa Bicakci" , stable@kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sunday, September 12, 2010, Minchan Kim wrote: >> Adnrew, Please drop my old version and merge this verstion. >> (old : vmscan-check-all_unreclaimable-in-direct-reclaim-path.patch) >> >>  * Changelog from v2 >>    * remove inline - suggested by Andrew >>    * add function desription - suggeseted by Adnrew >> >> == CUT HERE == > > For the record, this commit: > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=6715045ddc7472a22be5e49d4047d2d89b391f45 > > is reported to fix the problem without the $subject patch (see > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/9/11/129).  So, I'm not sure if it's still necessary > to special case this particular situation? I didn't follow your patch. If your patch can fix the problem, We don't need new overhead direct reclaim without big benefit. So I don't care of dropping this patch. We need agreement of another author KOSAKI. Thanks for the information, Rafael. :) -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail191.messagelabs.com (mail191.messagelabs.com [216.82.242.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 62CD36B00C7 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 20:47:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: by iwn33 with SMTP id 33so5990018iwn.14 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 17:47:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201009121942.53543.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <20100912163200.GA4098@barrios-desktop> <201009121942.53543.rjw@sisk.pl> Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 09:47:02 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vmscan: check all_unreclaimable in direct reclaim path From: Minchan Kim Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm , LKML , KOSAKI Motohiro , Johannes Weiner , Rik van Riel , "M. Vefa Bicakci" , stable@kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sunday, September 12, 2010, Minchan Kim wrote: >> Adnrew, Please drop my old version and merge this verstion. >> (old : vmscan-check-all_unreclaimable-in-direct-reclaim-path.patch) >> >> =A0* Changelog from v2 >> =A0 =A0* remove inline - suggested by Andrew >> =A0 =A0* add function desription - suggeseted by Adnrew >> >> =3D=3D CUT HERE =3D=3D > > For the record, this commit: > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=3Dlinux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=3Dco= mmit;h=3D6715045ddc7472a22be5e49d4047d2d89b391f45 > > is reported to fix the problem without the $subject patch (see > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/9/11/129). =A0So, I'm not sure if it's still ne= cessary > to special case this particular situation? I didn't follow your patch. If your patch can fix the problem, We don't need new overhead direct reclaim without big benefit. So I don't care of dropping this patch. We need agreement of another author KOSAKI. Thanks for the information, Rafael. :) --=20 Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- 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