From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: forbid lumpy-reclaim in shrink_active_list()
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:14:40 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F6793B0.50601@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1203191239570.3498@eggly.anvils>
On 03/19/2012 04:05 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Mar 2012, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> It was done that way, because Mel explained to me that deactivating
>> a whole chunk of active pages at once is a desired feature that makes
>> it more likely that a whole contiguous chunk of pages will eventually
>> reach the end of the inactive list.
>
> I'm rather sceptical about this: is there a test which demonstrates
> a useful effect of that kind?
I am somewhat sceptical too, but since lumpy reclaim is
due to be removed anyway, I did not bother to investigate
its behaviour in any detail :)
--
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>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: forbid lumpy-reclaim in shrink_active_list()
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:14:40 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F6793B0.50601@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1203191239570.3498@eggly.anvils>
On 03/19/2012 04:05 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Mar 2012, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> It was done that way, because Mel explained to me that deactivating
>> a whole chunk of active pages at once is a desired feature that makes
>> it more likely that a whole contiguous chunk of pages will eventually
>> reach the end of the inactive list.
>
> I'm rather sceptical about this: is there a test which demonstrates
> a useful effect of that kind?
I am somewhat sceptical too, but since lumpy reclaim is
due to be removed anyway, I did not bother to investigate
its behaviour in any detail :)
--
All rights reversed
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-19 20:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-19 9:18 [PATCH] mm: forbid lumpy-reclaim in shrink_active_list() Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-19 9:18 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-19 14:35 ` Johannes Weiner
2012-03-19 14:35 ` Johannes Weiner
2012-03-19 17:40 ` Rik van Riel
2012-03-19 17:40 ` Rik van Riel
2012-03-19 17:58 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-19 17:58 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-19 18:03 ` Rik van Riel
2012-03-19 18:03 ` Rik van Riel
2012-03-19 20:05 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-19 20:05 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-19 20:14 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2012-03-19 20:14 ` Rik van Riel
2012-03-21 11:45 ` Mel Gorman
2012-03-21 11:45 ` Mel Gorman
2012-03-21 0:28 ` Minchan Kim
2012-03-21 0:28 ` Minchan Kim
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=4F6793B0.50601@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jweiner@redhat.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=khlebnikov@openvz.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=minchan@kernel.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.