On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 8:57 AM Johannes Weiner wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 10:00:07AM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:47 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu 07-05-20 09:33:01, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > @@ -2600,8 +2596,23 @@ static int
On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 10:00:07AM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:47 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Thu 07-05-20 09:33:01, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > [...]
> > > @@ -2600,8 +2596,23 @@ static int try_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> > > gfp_t gfp_mask,
> > >
On Thu 07-05-20 09:33:01, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> Currently the reclaim of excessive usage over memory.high is scheduled
> to run on returning to the userland. The main reason behind this
> approach was simplicity i.e. always reclaim with GFP_KERNEL context.
> However the underlying assumptions
On Thu 07-05-20 10:00:07, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:47 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Thu 07-05-20 09:33:01, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > [...]
> > > @@ -2600,8 +2596,23 @@ static int try_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> > > gfp_t gfp_mask,
> > >
On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:47 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Thu 07-05-20 09:33:01, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> [...]
> > @@ -2600,8 +2596,23 @@ static int try_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> > gfp_t gfp_mask,
> > schedule_work(>high_work);
> >
On Thu 07-05-20 09:33:01, Shakeel Butt wrote:
[...]
> @@ -2600,8 +2596,23 @@ static int try_charge(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, gfp_t
> gfp_mask,
> schedule_work(>high_work);
> break;
> }
> -
Currently the reclaim of excessive usage over memory.high is scheduled
to run on returning to the userland. The main reason behind this
approach was simplicity i.e. always reclaim with GFP_KERNEL context.
However the underlying assumptions behind this approach are: the current
task shares the
7 matches
Mail list logo
