lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2024]   [Feb]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3] mm: memcg: Use larger batches for proactive reclaim
On Mon 05-02-24 12:47:47, T.J. Mercier wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 12:36 PM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote:
[...]
> > This of something like
> > timeout $TIMEOUT echo $TARGET > $MEMCG_PATH/memory.reclaim
> > where timeout acts as a stop gap if the reclaim cannot finish in
> > TIMEOUT.
>
> Yeah I get the desired behavior, but using sc->nr_reclaimed to achieve
> it is what's bothering me.

I am not really happy about this subtlety. If we have a better way then
let's do it. Better in its own patch, though.

> It's already wired up that way though, so if you want to make this
> change now then I can try to test for the difference using really
> large reclaim targets.

Yes, please. If you want it a separate patch then no objection from me
of course. If you do no like the nr_to_reclaim bailout then maybe we can
go with a simple break out flag in scan_control.

Thanks!
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2024-05-27 14:49    [W:0.072 / U:0.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site