Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 10 Jan 2008 08:56:31 +0530 | From | Balbir Singh <> | Subject | Re: [patch 05/19] split LRU lists into anon & file sets |
| |
* KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> [2008-01-10 11:36:18]:
> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 07:51:33 +0530 > Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > #define PAGE_CGROUP_FLAG_CACHE (0x1) /* charged as cache */ > > > > #define PAGE_CGROUP_FLAG_ACTIVE (0x2) /* page is active in this cgroup */ > > > > +#define PAGE_CGROUP_FLAG_FILE (0x4) /* page is file system backed */ > > > > > > > > > > Now, we don't have control_type and a feature for accounting only CACHE. > > > Balbir-san, do you have some new plan ? > > > > > > > Hi, KAMEZAWA-San, > > > > The control_type feature is gone. We still have cached page > > accounting, but we do not allow control of only RSS pages anymore. We > > need to control both RSS+cached pages. I do not understand your > > question about new plan? Is it about adding back control_type? > > > Ah, just wanted to confirm that we can drop PAGE_CGROUP_FLAG_CACHE > if page_file_cache() function and split-LRU is introduced. >
Earlier we would have had a problem, since we even accounted for swap cache with PAGE_CGROUP_FLAG_CACHE and I think page_file_cache() does not account swap cache pages with page_file_cache(). Our accounting is based on mapped vs unmapped whereas the new code from Rik accounts file vs anonymous. I suspect we could live a little while longer with PAGE_CGROUP_FLAG_CACHE and then if we do not need it at all, we can mark it down for removal. What do you think?
-- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL
| |