From: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Use memory compaction instead of lumpy reclaim during high-order allocations
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:45:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101119154540.GG10039@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101119140532.GH28613@csn.ul.ie>
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 02:05:32PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >
> > How about making the default before 2.6.40, as an initial step?
> >
>
> It'd be a reasonable way of ensuring it's being tested everywhere
> and not by those that are interested or using distro kernel configs.
> I guess we'd set to "default y" in the same patch that adds the note to
> feature-removal-schedule.txt.
I'd suggest doing it now (or soon, before 2.6.40), just to make sure
there aren't massive complaints about performance regressions, etc.,
and then deprecating it at say 2.6.42, and then waiting 6-9 months
before removing it. But, I'm a bit more conservative about making
such changes.
(Said the person who has reluctantly agreed to keep the minixdf mount
option after we found users when we tried deprecating it. :-)
- Ted
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Use memory compaction instead of lumpy reclaim during high-order allocations
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:45:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101119154540.GG10039@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101119140532.GH28613@csn.ul.ie>
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 02:05:32PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >
> > How about making the default before 2.6.40, as an initial step?
> >
>
> It'd be a reasonable way of ensuring it's being tested everywhere
> and not by those that are interested or using distro kernel configs.
> I guess we'd set to "default y" in the same patch that adds the note to
> feature-removal-schedule.txt.
I'd suggest doing it now (or soon, before 2.6.40), just to make sure
there aren't massive complaints about performance regressions, etc.,
and then deprecating it at say 2.6.42, and then waiting 6-9 months
before removing it. But, I'm a bit more conservative about making
such changes.
(Said the person who has reluctantly agreed to keep the minixdf mount
option after we found users when we tried deprecating it. :-)
- Ted
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-19 15:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-17 16:22 [PATCH 0/8] Use memory compaction instead of lumpy reclaim during high-order allocations Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` [PATCH 1/8] mm: compaction: Add trace events for memory compaction activity Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` [PATCH 2/8] mm: vmscan: Convert lumpy_mode into a bitmask Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` [PATCH 3/8] mm: vmscan: Reclaim order-0 and use compaction instead of lumpy reclaim Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 18:09 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-11-18 18:09 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-11-18 18:30 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 18:30 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` [PATCH 4/8] mm: migration: Allow migration to operate asynchronously and avoid synchronous compaction in the faster path Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 18:21 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-11-18 18:21 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-11-18 18:34 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 18:34 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 19:00 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-11-18 19:00 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-11-17 16:22 ` [PATCH 5/8] mm: migration: Cleanup migrate_pages API by matching types for offlining and sync Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` [PATCH 6/8] mm: compaction: Perform a faster scan in try_to_compact_pages() Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 18:34 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-11-18 18:34 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-11-18 18:50 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 18:50 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 19:08 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-11-18 19:08 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-11-19 11:16 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-19 11:16 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` [PATCH 7/8] mm: compaction: Use the LRU to get a hint on where compaction should start Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 9:10 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-11-18 9:10 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-11-18 9:28 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 9:28 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 18:46 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-11-18 18:46 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2010-11-19 11:08 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-19 11:08 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` [PATCH 8/8] mm: vmscan: Rename lumpy_mode to reclaim_mode Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 16:22 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-17 23:46 ` [PATCH 0/8] Use memory compaction instead of lumpy reclaim during high-order allocations Andrew Morton
2010-11-17 23:46 ` Andrew Morton
2010-11-18 2:03 ` Rik van Riel
2010-11-18 2:03 ` Rik van Riel
2010-11-18 8:12 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 8:12 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 8:26 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-11-18 8:26 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-11-18 8:38 ` Johannes Weiner
2010-11-18 8:38 ` Johannes Weiner
2010-11-18 9:20 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 9:20 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 19:49 ` Andrew Morton
2010-11-18 19:49 ` Andrew Morton
2010-11-19 10:48 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-19 10:48 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-19 12:43 ` Theodore Tso
2010-11-19 12:43 ` Theodore Tso
2010-11-19 14:05 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-19 14:05 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-19 15:45 ` Ted Ts'o [this message]
2010-11-19 15:45 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-11-18 8:44 ` Mel Gorman
2010-11-18 8:44 ` Mel Gorman
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=20101119154540.GG10039@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
/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.