From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: PERF: performance tests with the split LRU VM in -mm
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 09:28:53 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080729092853.0ddf7013@bree.surriel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y73k4yhg.fsf@saeurebad.de>
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:21:47 +0200
Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de> wrote:
> Here is my original patch that just gets rid of it. It did not cause
> any problems to me on high pressure. Rik, you said on IRC that you now
> also think the patch is safe..?
Yes. Removing the "+ 1" is safe because we do not scan until
zone->lru[l].nr_scan reaches swap_cluster_max, which means that
the scan counter for small lists will also slowly increase and
no list will be left behind.
> From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
> Subject: mm: don't accumulate scan pressure on unrelated lists
>
> During each reclaim scan we accumulate scan pressure on unrelated
> lists which will result in bogus scans and unwanted reclaims
> eventually.
This patch fixes the balancing issues that we have been seeing
with the split LRU VM currently in -mm.
It is my preferred patch because it removes magic from the VM,
instead of adding some.
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
--
All rights reversed.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: PERF: performance tests with the split LRU VM in -mm
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 09:28:53 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080729092853.0ddf7013@bree.surriel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y73k4yhg.fsf@saeurebad.de>
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:21:47 +0200
Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de> wrote:
> Here is my original patch that just gets rid of it. It did not cause
> any problems to me on high pressure. Rik, you said on IRC that you now
> also think the patch is safe..?
Yes. Removing the "+ 1" is safe because we do not scan until
zone->lru[l].nr_scan reaches swap_cluster_max, which means that
the scan counter for small lists will also slowly increase and
no list will be left behind.
> From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
> Subject: mm: don't accumulate scan pressure on unrelated lists
>
> During each reclaim scan we accumulate scan pressure on unrelated
> lists which will result in bogus scans and unwanted reclaims
> eventually.
This patch fixes the balancing issues that we have been seeing
with the split LRU VM currently in -mm.
It is my preferred patch because it removes magic from the VM,
instead of adding some.
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
--
All rights reversed.
--
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:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-29 13:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-25 2:25 PERF: performance tests with the split LRU VM in -mm Rik van Riel
2008-07-25 2:25 ` Rik van Riel
2008-07-28 14:57 ` Rik van Riel
2008-07-28 14:57 ` Rik van Riel
2008-07-28 15:30 ` Ray Lee
2008-07-28 15:30 ` Ray Lee
2008-07-28 23:41 ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-28 23:41 ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-28 23:57 ` Rik van Riel
2008-07-28 23:57 ` Rik van Riel
2008-07-29 0:03 ` Rik van Riel
2008-07-29 0:03 ` Rik van Riel
2008-07-29 0:17 ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-29 0:17 ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-29 0:31 ` Rik van Riel
2008-07-29 0:31 ` Rik van Riel
2008-07-29 0:46 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-07-29 0:46 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-07-29 13:21 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-07-29 13:21 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-07-29 13:28 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2008-07-29 13:28 ` Rik van Riel
2008-07-29 13:04 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-07-29 13:04 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-07-29 13:16 ` Rik van Riel
2008-07-29 13:16 ` Rik van Riel
2008-07-29 13:51 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-07-29 13:51 ` Johannes Weiner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080729092853.0ddf7013@bree.surriel.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@saeurebad.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.