Commit d37dd5dc authored by Fengguang Wu's avatar Fengguang Wu Committed by Linus Torvalds

vmscan: comment too_many_isolated()

Comment "Why it's doing so" rather than "What it does" as proposed by
Andrew Morton.
Signed-off-by: default avatarWu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarKOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarMinchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarRik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Signed-off-by: default avatarAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: default avatarLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
parent dc053733
...@@ -1177,7 +1177,11 @@ int isolate_lru_page(struct page *page) ...@@ -1177,7 +1177,11 @@ int isolate_lru_page(struct page *page)
} }
/* /*
* Are there way too many processes in the direct reclaim path already? * A direct reclaimer may isolate SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX pages from the LRU list and
* then get resheduled. When there are massive number of tasks doing page
* allocation, such sleeping direct reclaimers may keep piling up on each CPU,
* the LRU list will go small and be scanned faster than necessary, leading to
* unnecessary swapping, thrashing and OOM.
*/ */
static int too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone, int file, static int too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone, int file,
struct scan_control *sc) struct scan_control *sc)
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment