Re: Might refill_inactive_zone () be too aggressive?

[Marc Singer <elf@buici.com>]

On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 11:10:42AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 10:57:24AM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
> > I don't think that's the whole story.  I printed distress,
> > mapped_ratio, and swappiness when vmscan starts trying to reclaim
> > mapped pages.
> > reclaim_mapped: distress 50  mapped_ratio 0  swappiness 60 
> >   50 + 60 > 100 
> > So, part of the problem is swappiness.  I could set that value to 25,
> > for example, to stop the machine from swapping.
> > I'd be fine stopping here, except for you comment about what
> > swappiness means.  In my case, nearly none of memory is mapped.  It is
> > zone priority which has dropped to 1 that is precipitating the
> > eviction.  Is this what you expect and want?
> 
> I'm not sure it's expected. Maybe this patch fares better?

Ah, that's a much different thing.  That works for me.  Is that
something you'd want to put into the kernel?

> 
> 
> -- wli
> 
> 
> Index: singer-2.6.5-mm6/mm/vmscan.c
> ===================================================================
> --- singer-2.6.5-mm6.orig/mm/vmscan.c	2004-04-14 23:21:19.000000000 -0700
> +++ singer-2.6.5-mm6/mm/vmscan.c	2004-04-17 11:09:35.000000000 -0700
> @@ -636,7 +636,7 @@
>  	 *
>  	 * A 100% value of vm_swappiness overrides this algorithm altogether.
>  	 */
> -	swap_tendency = mapped_ratio / 2 + distress + vm_swappiness;
> +	swap_tendency = mapped_ratio / 2 + max(distress, vm_swappiness);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Now use this metric to decide whether to start moving mapped memory
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>