Re: [PATCH 9/9] mm: remove unnecessary back-off function when retrying page reclaim

[Hillf Danton]

On March 01, 2017 5:40 AM Johannes Weiner wrote:
> 
> The backoff mechanism is not needed. If we have MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES
> loops without progress, we'll OOM anyway; backing off might cut one or
> two iterations off that in the rare OOM case. If we have intermittent
> success reclaiming a few pages, the backoff function gets reset also,
> and so is of little help in these scenarios.
> 
> We might want a backoff function for when there IS progress, but not
> enough to be satisfactory. But this isn't that. Remove it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
Acked-by: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>