vmscan: comment too_many_isolated()

Comment "Why it's doing so" rather than "What it does" as proposed by
Andrew Morton.

Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index 7f3096137b8a4dc288ba509a98429a1b048bc55f..e73d0206dddd44f3d4b651ac37fa5146e7ea694c 100644 (file)
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -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,
                struct scan_control *sc)