From 7ae534d074e01e54d5cfbc9734b73fdfc855501f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 15:08:44 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] memcg: fix wrong check of noswap with softlimit
Hierarchical reclaim doesn't swap out if memsw and resource limits are
thye same (memsw_is_minimum == true) because we would hit mem+swap limit
anyway (during hard limit reclaim).
If it comes to the soft limit we shouldn't consider memsw_is_minimum at
all because it doesn't make much sense. Either the soft limit is bellow
the hard limit and then we cannot hit mem+swap limit or the direct reclaim
takes a precedence.
Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Reviewed-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Acked-by: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 02a7947608ad..0b1a32cbd74d 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -1663,7 +1663,7 @@ static int mem_cgroup_hierarchical_reclaim(struct mem_cgroup *root_mem,
excess = res_counter_soft_limit_excess(&root_mem->res) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
/* If memsw_is_minimum==1, swap-out is of-no-use. */
- if (root_mem->memsw_is_minimum)
+ if (!check_soft && root_mem->memsw_is_minimum)
noswap = true;
while (1) {
--
2.34.1