On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:55:02PM +0800, Chen Yucong wrote:
> Via https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/10/897, we can know that the relative design
> idea is to keep
>
> scan_target[anon] : scan_target[file]
> == really_scanned_num[anon] : really_scanned_num[file]
>
> But we can find the
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 01:13:22PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 10:02:39 +0900 Minchan Kim wrote:
>
> > > > @@ -2057,8 +2057,7 @@ out:
> > > > static void shrink_lruvec(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control
> > > > *sc)
> > > > {
> > > > unsigned long
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 01:13:22PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 10:02:39 +0900 Minchan Kim minc...@kernel.org wrote:
@@ -2057,8 +2057,7 @@ out:
static void shrink_lruvec(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control
*sc)
{
unsigned long
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:55:02PM +0800, Chen Yucong wrote:
Via https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/10/897, we can know that the relative design
idea is to keep
scan_target[anon] : scan_target[file]
== really_scanned_num[anon] : really_scanned_num[file]
But we can find the following
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 10:02:39 +0900 Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > @@ -2057,8 +2057,7 @@ out:
> > > static void shrink_lruvec(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control
> > > *sc)
> > > {
> > > unsigned long nr[NR_LRU_LISTS];
> > > - unsigned long targets[NR_LRU_LISTS];
> > > -
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 10:02:39 +0900 Minchan Kim minc...@kernel.org wrote:
@@ -2057,8 +2057,7 @@ out:
static void shrink_lruvec(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control
*sc)
{
unsigned long nr[NR_LRU_LISTS];
- unsigned long targets[NR_LRU_LISTS];
-
Hello Andrew,
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 05:40:01PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 08:04:32 +0800 Chen Yucong wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 15:27 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:55:02 +0800 Chen Yucong wrote:
> > >
> > > > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 08:04:32 +0800 Chen Yucong wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 15:27 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:55:02 +0800 Chen Yucong wrote:
> >
> > > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> > > index a8ffe4e..2c35e34 100644
> > > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > > +++
On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 15:27 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:55:02 +0800 Chen Yucong wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> > index a8ffe4e..2c35e34 100644
> > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > @@ -2087,8 +2086,8 @@ static void shrink_lruvec(struct
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:55:02 +0800 Chen Yucong wrote:
> Via https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/10/897, we can know that the relative design
> idea is to keep
>
> scan_target[anon] : scan_target[file]
> == really_scanned_num[anon] : really_scanned_num[file]
>
> But we can find the
On 06/18/2014 11:08 AM, Chen Yucong wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 11:00 +0200, Jerome Marchand wrote:
>>> if (!nr_file || !nr_anon)
>>> break;
>>>
>>> - if (nr_file > nr_anon) {
>>> - unsigned long scan_target =
>>
On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 11:00 +0200, Jerome Marchand wrote:
> > if (!nr_file || !nr_anon)
> > break;
> >
> > - if (nr_file > nr_anon) {
> > - unsigned long scan_target =
> targets[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON] +
> >
> -
On 06/17/2014 06:55 AM, Chen Yucong wrote:
> Via https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/10/897, we can know that the relative design
> idea is to keep
>
> scan_target[anon] : scan_target[file]
> == really_scanned_num[anon] : really_scanned_num[file]
>
> But we can find the following snippet in
On 06/17/2014 06:55 AM, Chen Yucong wrote:
Via https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/10/897, we can know that the relative design
idea is to keep
scan_target[anon] : scan_target[file]
== really_scanned_num[anon] : really_scanned_num[file]
But we can find the following snippet in
On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 11:00 +0200, Jerome Marchand wrote:
if (!nr_file || !nr_anon)
break;
- if (nr_file nr_anon) {
- unsigned long scan_target =
targets[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON] +
-
On 06/18/2014 11:08 AM, Chen Yucong wrote:
On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 11:00 +0200, Jerome Marchand wrote:
if (!nr_file || !nr_anon)
break;
- if (nr_file nr_anon) {
- unsigned long scan_target =
targets[LRU_INACTIVE_ANON] +
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:55:02 +0800 Chen Yucong sla...@gmail.com wrote:
Via https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/10/897, we can know that the relative design
idea is to keep
scan_target[anon] : scan_target[file]
== really_scanned_num[anon] : really_scanned_num[file]
But we can find
On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 15:27 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:55:02 +0800 Chen Yucong sla...@gmail.com wrote:
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index a8ffe4e..2c35e34 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -2087,8 +2086,8 @@ static void
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 08:04:32 +0800 Chen Yucong sla...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 15:27 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:55:02 +0800 Chen Yucong sla...@gmail.com wrote:
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index a8ffe4e..2c35e34 100644
---
Hello Andrew,
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 05:40:01PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 08:04:32 +0800 Chen Yucong sla...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 15:27 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 12:55:02 +0800 Chen Yucong sla...@gmail.com wrote:
diff
Via https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/10/897, we can know that the relative design
idea is to keep
scan_target[anon] : scan_target[file]
== really_scanned_num[anon] : really_scanned_num[file]
But we can find the following snippet in shrink_lruvec():
if (nr_file > nr_anon) {
Via https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/10/897, we can know that the relative design
idea is to keep
scan_target[anon] : scan_target[file]
== really_scanned_num[anon] : really_scanned_num[file]
But we can find the following snippet in shrink_lruvec():
if (nr_file nr_anon) {
22 matches
Mail list logo
