Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

2016-06-23 Thread Minchan Kim
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 05:56:52PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 04:42:08PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 01:01:29PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 04:49:45PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

2016-06-22 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 04:42:08PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 01:01:29PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 04:49:45PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:12:07AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

2016-06-20 Thread Minchan Kim
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 01:01:29PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 04:49:45PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:12:07AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:23:41AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

2016-06-17 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 04:49:45PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:12:07AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:23:41AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:52:31AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 11:

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

2016-06-17 Thread Minchan Kim
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:12:07AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:23:41AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:52:31AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 11:19:35AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > > Other concern about PG_work

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

2016-06-16 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:23:41AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:52:31AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 11:19:35AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > Other concern about PG_workingset is naming. For file-backed pages, it's > > > good because file-bac

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

2016-06-14 Thread Minchan Kim
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:52:31AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 11:19:35AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 03:48:36PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > @@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ enum pageflags { > > > PG_dirty, > > > PG_lru, > > > PG_active, > > > +

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

2016-06-13 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 11:19:35AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 03:48:36PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > @@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ enum pageflags { > > PG_dirty, > > PG_lru, > > PG_active, > > + PG_workingset, > > I think PG_workingset might be a good flag in the f

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

2016-06-09 Thread Minchan Kim
Hi Hannes, On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 03:48:36PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > Since the LRUs were split into anon and file lists, the VM has been > balancing between page cache and anonymous pages based on per-list > ratios of scanned vs. rotated pages. In most cases that tips page > reclaim towar

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

2016-06-08 Thread Michal Hocko
On Mon 06-06-16 15:48:36, Johannes Weiner wrote: > Since the LRUs were split into anon and file lists, the VM has been > balancing between page cache and anonymous pages based on per-list > ratios of scanned vs. rotated pages. In most cases that tips page > reclaim towards the list that is easier t

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

2016-06-07 Thread Tim Chen
On Tue, 2016-06-07 at 12:23 -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > Hi Tim, > > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 04:50:23PM -0700, Tim Chen wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2016-06-06 at 15:48 -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > > > > To tell inactive from active refaults, a page flag is introduced that > > > marks pages

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

2016-06-07 Thread Johannes Weiner
Hi Tim, On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 04:50:23PM -0700, Tim Chen wrote: > On Mon, 2016-06-06 at 15:48 -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > To tell inactive from active refaults, a page flag is introduced that > > marks pages that have been on the active list in their lifetime. This > > flag is remembered i

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

2016-06-06 Thread Tim Chen
On Mon, 2016-06-06 at 15:48 -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > Since the LRUs were split into anon and file lists, the VM has been > balancing between page cache and anonymous pages based on per-list > ratios of scanned vs. rotated pages. In most cases that tips page > reclaim towards the list that is

Re: [PATCH 10/10] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing

2016-06-06 Thread kbuild test robot
Hi, [auto build test ERROR on cifs/for-next] [also build test ERROR on v4.7-rc2 next-20160606] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Johannes-Weiner/mm-balance-LRU-lists-based-on-relati