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

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

2016-06-06 Thread Johannes Weiner
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 to reclaim and has the fewest actively used pages, but the