From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Removal of lumpy reclaim
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 14:10:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F8325FB.80409@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1204061316580.3057@eggly.anvils>
On 04/06/2012 04:31 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Apr 2012, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 17:06:21 +0100
>> Mel Gorman<mgorman@suse.de> wrote:
>>
>>> (cc'ing active people in the thread "[patch 68/92] mm: forbid lumpy-reclaim
>>> in shrink_active_list()")
>>>
>>> In the interest of keeping my fingers from the flames at LSF/MM, I'm
>>> releasing an RFC for lumpy reclaim removal.
>>
>> I grabbed them, thanks.
>
> I do have a concern with this: I was expecting lumpy reclaim to be
> replaced by compaction, and indeed it is when CONFIG_COMPACTION=y.
> But when CONFIG_COMPACTION is not set, we're back to 2.6.22 in
> relying upon blind chance to provide order>0 pages.
Is this an issue for any architecture?
I could see NOMMU being unable to use compaction, but
chances are lumpy reclaim would be sufficient for that
configuration, anyway...
--
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: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Removal of lumpy reclaim
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 14:10:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F8325FB.80409@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1204061316580.3057@eggly.anvils>
On 04/06/2012 04:31 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Apr 2012, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 17:06:21 +0100
>> Mel Gorman<mgorman@suse.de> wrote:
>>
>>> (cc'ing active people in the thread "[patch 68/92] mm: forbid lumpy-reclaim
>>> in shrink_active_list()")
>>>
>>> In the interest of keeping my fingers from the flames at LSF/MM, I'm
>>> releasing an RFC for lumpy reclaim removal.
>>
>> I grabbed them, thanks.
>
> I do have a concern with this: I was expecting lumpy reclaim to be
> replaced by compaction, and indeed it is when CONFIG_COMPACTION=y.
> But when CONFIG_COMPACTION is not set, we're back to 2.6.22 in
> relying upon blind chance to provide order>0 pages.
Is this an issue for any architecture?
I could see NOMMU being unable to use compaction, but
chances are lumpy reclaim would be sufficient for that
configuration, anyway...
--
All rights reversed
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-09 18:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-28 16:06 [RFC PATCH 0/2] Removal of lumpy reclaim Mel Gorman
2012-03-28 16:06 ` Mel Gorman
2012-03-28 16:06 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm: vmscan: Remove " Mel Gorman
2012-03-28 16:06 ` Mel Gorman
2012-04-06 23:52 ` Ying Han
2012-04-06 23:52 ` Ying Han
2012-04-10 8:24 ` Mel Gorman
2012-04-10 8:24 ` Mel Gorman
2012-04-10 9:29 ` Mel Gorman
2012-04-10 9:29 ` Mel Gorman
2012-04-10 17:25 ` Ying Han
2012-04-10 17:25 ` Ying Han
2012-03-28 16:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm: vmscan: Remove reclaim_mode_t Mel Gorman
2012-03-28 16:06 ` Mel Gorman
2012-04-06 19:34 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] Removal of lumpy reclaim Andrew Morton
2012-04-06 19:34 ` Andrew Morton
2012-04-06 20:31 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-04-06 20:31 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-04-07 3:00 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-04-07 3:00 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2012-04-09 18:10 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2012-04-09 18:10 ` Rik van Riel
2012-04-09 19:18 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-04-09 19:18 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-04-09 23:40 ` Rik van Riel
2012-04-09 23:40 ` Rik van Riel
2012-04-10 8:32 ` Mel Gorman
2012-04-10 8:32 ` 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=4F8325FB.80409@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=khlebnikov@openvz.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.