From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758194AbXIFQik (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Sep 2007 12:38:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757609AbXIFQi0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Sep 2007 12:38:26 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:54246 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757575AbXIFQiZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Sep 2007 12:38:25 -0400 Message-ID: <46E02CF5.3020301@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 12:38:13 -0400 From: Rik van Riel Organization: Red Hat, Inc User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20061008) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, safari-kernel@safari.iki.fi Subject: Re: [PATCH] prevent kswapd from freeing excessive amounts of lowmem References: <46DF3545.4050604@redhat.com> <20070905182305.e5d08acf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20070905182305.e5d08acf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton wrote: > I guess for a very small upper zone and a very large lower zone this could > still put the scan balancing out of whack, fixable by a smarter version of > "8*zone->pages_high" but it doesn't seem very likely that this will affect > things much. > > Why doesn't direct reclaim need similar treatment? Because we only go into the direct reclaim path once every zone is at or below zone->pages_low, and the direct reclaim path will exit once we have freed more than swap_cluster_max pages. -- Politics is the struggle between those who want to make their country the best in the world, and those who believe it already is. Each group calls the other unpatriotic. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <46E02CF5.3020301@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 12:38:13 -0400 From: Rik van Riel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] prevent kswapd from freeing excessive amounts of lowmem References: <46DF3545.4050604@redhat.com> <20070905182305.e5d08acf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20070905182305.e5d08acf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, safari-kernel@safari.iki.fi List-ID: Andrew Morton wrote: > I guess for a very small upper zone and a very large lower zone this could > still put the scan balancing out of whack, fixable by a smarter version of > "8*zone->pages_high" but it doesn't seem very likely that this will affect > things much. > > Why doesn't direct reclaim need similar treatment? Because we only go into the direct reclaim path once every zone is at or below zone->pages_low, and the direct reclaim path will exit once we have freed more than swap_cluster_max pages. -- Politics is the struggle between those who want to make their country the best in the world, and those who believe it already is. Each group calls the other unpatriotic. -- 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: email@kvack.org