Shakeel Butt writes:
What was the initial reason to have different behavior in the first place?
This differing behaviour is simply a mistake, it was never intended to be this deviate from what happens elsewhere. To that extent this patch is as much a bug fix as it is an improvement.
static void high_work_func(struct work_struct *work) @@ -2378,16 +2384,20 @@ void mem_cgroup_handle_over_high(void) { unsigned long penalty_jiffies; unsigned long pflags; + unsigned long nr_reclaimed; unsigned int nr_pages = current->memcg_nr_pages_over_high;Is there any benefit to keep current->memcg_nr_pages_over_high after this change? Why not just use SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX?
I don't feel strongly either way, but current->memcg_nr_pages_over_high can be very large for large allocations.
That said, maybe we should just reclaim `max(SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX, current - high)` for each loop? I agree that with this design it looks like perhaps we don't need it any more.
Johannes, what do you think?
