From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] limit direct reclaim for higher order allocations
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:31:07 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E809ABB.2020807@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110926150212.GB11313@suse.de>
On 09/26/2011 11:02 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> I don't have a proper patch prepared but I think it is a mistake for
> reclaim and compaction to be using different logic when deciding
> if action should be taken. Compaction uses compaction_suitable()
> and compaction_deferred() to decide whether it should compact or not
> and reclaim/compaction should share the same logic. I don't have a
> proper patch but the check would look something like;
Mel and I just hashed out the details on IRC.
I'm building a test kernel with the new logic now and will
post an updated patch if everything works as expected.
--
All rights reversed
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] limit direct reclaim for higher order allocations
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 11:31:07 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E809ABB.2020807@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110926150212.GB11313@suse.de>
On 09/26/2011 11:02 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> I don't have a proper patch prepared but I think it is a mistake for
> reclaim and compaction to be using different logic when deciding
> if action should be taken. Compaction uses compaction_suitable()
> and compaction_deferred() to decide whether it should compact or not
> and reclaim/compaction should share the same logic. I don't have a
> proper patch but the check would look something like;
Mel and I just hashed out the details on IRC.
I'm building a test kernel with the new logic now and will
post an updated patch if everything works as expected.
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-26 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-26 13:55 [PATCH -mm] limit direct reclaim for higher order allocations Rik van Riel
2011-09-26 13:55 ` Rik van Riel
2011-09-26 15:02 ` Mel Gorman
2011-09-26 15:02 ` Mel Gorman
2011-09-26 15:31 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2011-09-26 15:31 ` Rik van Riel
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=4E809ABB.2020807@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
/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.