Re: [PATCH] mm: memcg: remove checking reclaim order in soft limitreclaim

[Michal Hocko]

Hi,

On Tue 17-01-12 20:47:59, Hillf Danton wrote:
> If async order-O reclaim expected here, it is settled down when setting up scan
> control, with scan priority hacked to be zero. Other than that, deny of reclaim
> should be removed.

Maybe I have misunderstood you but this is not right. The check is to
protect from the _global_ reclaim with order > 0 when we prevent from
memcg soft reclaim.

> Signed-off-by: Hillf Danton <dhillf@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> 
> --- a/mm/memcontrol.c	Tue Jan 17 20:41:36 2012
> +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c	Tue Jan 17 20:47:48 2012
> @@ -3512,9 +3512,6 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_soft_limit_recl
>  	unsigned long long excess;
>  	unsigned long nr_scanned;
> 
> -	if (order > 0)
> -		return 0;
> -
>  	mctz = soft_limit_tree_node_zone(zone_to_nid(zone), zone_idx(zone));
>  	/*
>  	 * This loop can run a while, specially if mem_cgroup's continuously
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx  For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
SUSE LINUX s.r.o.
Lihovarska 1060/12
190 00 Praha 9    
Czech Republic
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/