On 12/05/2013 09:01 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 10:31:32AM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
>> On 12/04/2013 08:51 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 04:15:57PM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
On 12/03/2013 02:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> @@ -236,11
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 10:31:32AM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> On 12/04/2013 08:51 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 04:15:57PM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> >> On 12/03/2013 02:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> @@ -236,11 +236,17 @@ shrink_slab_node(struct shrink_control
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 10:31:32AM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
On 12/04/2013 08:51 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 04:15:57PM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
On 12/03/2013 02:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
@@ -236,11 +236,17 @@ shrink_slab_node(struct shrink_control
On 12/05/2013 09:01 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 10:31:32AM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
On 12/04/2013 08:51 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 04:15:57PM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
On 12/03/2013 02:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
@@ -236,11 +236,17 @@
On 12/04/2013 08:51 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 04:15:57PM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
>> On 12/03/2013 02:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
@@ -236,11 +236,17 @@ shrink_slab_node(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
struct shrinker *shrinker,
return 0;
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 04:15:57PM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> On 12/03/2013 02:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >> @@ -236,11 +236,17 @@ shrink_slab_node(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
> >> struct shrinker *shrinker,
> >>return 0;
> >>
> >>/*
> >> - * copy the current
On 12/03/2013 02:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> @@ -236,11 +236,17 @@ shrink_slab_node(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
>> struct shrinker *shrinker,
>> return 0;
>>
>> /*
>> - * copy the current shrinker scan count into a local variable
>> - * and zero it so that
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 03:19:44PM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> This patch makes direct reclaim path shrink slabs not only on global
> memory pressure, but also when we reach memory cgroup limit. To achieve
> that, it introduces a new per-shrinker flag, SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE, which
> should be
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 03:19:44PM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
This patch makes direct reclaim path shrink slabs not only on global
memory pressure, but also when we reach memory cgroup limit. To achieve
that, it introduces a new per-shrinker flag, SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE, which
should be set
On 12/03/2013 02:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
@@ -236,11 +236,17 @@ shrink_slab_node(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
struct shrinker *shrinker,
return 0;
/*
- * copy the current shrinker scan count into a local variable
- * and zero it so that other concurrent
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 04:15:57PM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
On 12/03/2013 02:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
@@ -236,11 +236,17 @@ shrink_slab_node(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
struct shrinker *shrinker,
return 0;
/*
- * copy the current shrinker scan count
On 12/04/2013 08:51 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 04:15:57PM +0400, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
On 12/03/2013 02:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
@@ -236,11 +236,17 @@ shrink_slab_node(struct shrink_control *shrinkctl,
struct shrinker *shrinker,
return 0;
/*
- *
This patch makes direct reclaim path shrink slabs not only on global
memory pressure, but also when we reach memory cgroup limit. To achieve
that, it introduces a new per-shrinker flag, SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE, which
should be set if the shrinker can handle per-memcg reclaim. For such
shrinkers,
This patch makes direct reclaim path shrink slabs not only on global
memory pressure, but also when we reach memory cgroup limit. To achieve
that, it introduces a new per-shrinker flag, SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE, which
should be set if the shrinker can handle per-memcg reclaim. For such
shrinkers,
14 matches
Mail list logo