二, 10月 18, 2016 at 02:52:47下午 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
hi,
> On Tue 18-10-16 15:29:50, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:42:45AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > Sure, what do you think about the following? I haven't marked it for
> > > stable because there was no bug repo
On Tue 18-10-16 15:29:50, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:42:45AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > Sure, what do you think about the following? I haven't marked it for
> > stable because there was no bug report for it AFAIU.
> > ---
> > From 3b2bd4486f36ada9f6dc86d3946855281455b
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:42:45AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 17-10-16 08:06:18, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > Hi Michal,
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 09:10:45AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Sat 15-10-16 00:26:33, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 05:03:55PM +0200, Mic
On Mon 17-10-16 10:42:44, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> Sure, what do you think about the following? I haven't marked it for
> stable because there was no bug report for it AFAIU.
And 0-day robot just noticed that I've screwed and need the following on
top. If the patch makes sense I will repost it
On Mon 17-10-16 08:06:18, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 09:10:45AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Sat 15-10-16 00:26:33, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 05:03:55PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compa
Hi Michal,
On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 09:10:45AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sat 15-10-16 00:26:33, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 05:03:55PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> > > index 0409a4ad6ea1..6584705a46f6 100644
> > >
On Sat 15-10-16 00:26:33, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 05:03:55PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> > index 0409a4ad6ea1..6584705a46f6 100644
> > --- a/mm/compaction.c
> > +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> > @@ -685,7 +685,8 @@ static bool t
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 05:03:55PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 14-10-16 23:44:48, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 03:53:34PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Fri 14-10-16 22:46:04, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > > > > Why don't you simply mimic what shrink_inactive
On Fri 14-10-16 23:44:48, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 03:53:34PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 14-10-16 22:46:04, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > > > Why don't you simply mimic what shrink_inactive_list does? Aka
> > > > > > count the
> > > > > > number of isolated pa
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 03:53:34PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 14-10-16 22:46:04, Minchan Kim wrote:
> [...]
> > > > > Why don't you simply mimic what shrink_inactive_list does? Aka count
> > > > > the
> > > > > number of isolated pages and then account them when appropriate?
> > > > >
> >
On Fri 14-10-16 22:46:04, Minchan Kim wrote:
[...]
> > > > Why don't you simply mimic what shrink_inactive_list does? Aka count the
> > > > number of isolated pages and then account them when appropriate?
> > > >
> > > I think i am correcting clearly wrong part. So, there is no need to
> > > descri
Hi, Michal,
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 01:30:44PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
< snip>
> > void putback_movable_pages(struct list_head *l)
> > {
> > ..
> > /*
> > * We isolated non-lru movable page so here we can use
> > * __PageMovable because LRU page's mapping cannot have
> >
On Fri 14-10-16 16:32:19, Ming Ling wrote:
> On 四, 10月 13, 2016 at 10:09:37上午 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Hello,
> > On Thu 13-10-16 14:39:09, ming.ling wrote:
> > > From: Ming Ling
> > >
> > > Non-lru pages don't belong to any lru, so counting them to
> > > NR_ISOLATED_ANON or NR_ISOLATED_FILE
On 四, 10月 13, 2016 at 10:09:37上午 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
Hello,
> On Thu 13-10-16 14:39:09, ming.ling wrote:
> > From: Ming Ling
> >
> > Non-lru pages don't belong to any lru, so counting them to
> > NR_ISOLATED_ANON or NR_ISOLATED_FILE doesn't make any sense.
> > It may misguide functions suc
On Thu 13-10-16 14:39:09, ming.ling wrote:
> From: Ming Ling
>
> Non-lru pages don't belong to any lru, so counting them to
> NR_ISOLATED_ANON or NR_ISOLATED_FILE doesn't make any sense.
> It may misguide functions such as pgdat_reclaimable_pages and
> too_many_isolated.
That doesn't make much s
From: Ming Ling
Non-lru pages don't belong to any lru, so counting them to
NR_ISOLATED_ANON or NR_ISOLATED_FILE doesn't make any sense.
It may misguide functions such as pgdat_reclaimable_pages and
too_many_isolated.
On mobile devices such as 512M ram android Phone, it may use
a big zram swap. In
16 matches
Mail list logo
