From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264635AbUGHROc (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jul 2004 13:14:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264726AbUGHROc (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jul 2004 13:14:32 -0400 Received: from webmail.sub.ru ([213.247.139.22]:7684 "HELO techno.sub.ru") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S264635AbUGHRO0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jul 2004 13:14:26 -0400 Subject: Re: [ck] Re: Autoregulate swappiness & inactivation From: Mikhail Ramendik To: Nick Piggin Cc: Con Kolivas , Andrew Morton , nigelenki@comcast.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ck@vds.kolivas.org In-Reply-To: <40ED01FF.6010206@yahoo.com.au> References: <40EC13C5.2000101@kolivas.org> <40EC1930.7010805@comcast.net> <40EC1B0A.8090802@kolivas.org> <20040707213822.2682790b.akpm@osdl.org> <40ECF278.7070606@yahoo.com.au> <40ECF86D.3060707@yahoo.com.au> <40ED01FF.6010206@yahoo.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1089306851.2753.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-6aspMR) Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 21:14:11 +0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, Nick Piggin wrote: > > Umm I think we're agreeing, no? I'm trying to leave the swappiness knob > > in for those who (think?) they know what they're doing. Somehow it needs > > to be turned to "manual" again. > No. Fold your all "autoswappiness" stuff directly into the > reclaim_mapped calculation that was previously keyed off swappiness. > Don't have it modify vm_swappiness at all: work directly on > reclaim_mapped. > > Then, you should be able to retain the user's vm_swappiness input > into the system as well. If you can't figure out a good place to > put this in, don't worry about it to start with. I, as a user, would be far less happy without the ability to set it to "the old way". Of course "the old" vs "the new" may become a kernel config option, but why is a recompile better than a sysctl? Out of principle? Yours, Mikhail Ramendik