From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Linux MM Mailing List <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [rfc] mm: more likely reclaim MADV_SEQUENTIAL mappings
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:20:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <874p36gekt.fsf@saeurebad.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48FDE9E9.5020805@redhat.com> (Rik van Riel's message of "Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:40:41 -0400")
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> writes:
> Johannes Weiner wrote:
>
>> I'm afraid this is now quite a bit more aggressive than the earlier
>> version. When the fault path did a mark_page_access(), we wouldn't
>> reclaim a page when it has been faulted into several MADV_SEQUENTIAL
>> mappings but now we ignore *every* activity through such a mapping.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Perhaps we should note a reference if there are two or more accesses
>> through sequentially read mappings?
>
> That can be easily accomplished by dropping the memory.c
> part of your patch.
I thought about that, but wouldn't we count a reference in the chain
fault -> unmap -> page_referenced()
opposed to counting _no_ reference in
fault -> page_referenced() -> ... -> unmap
?
Hannes
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-21 15:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-21 10:32 [rfc] mm: more likely reclaim MADV_SEQUENTIAL mappings Johannes Weiner
2008-10-21 10:43 ` Nick Piggin
2008-10-21 11:33 ` [patch] mm: more likely reclaim MADV_SEQUENTIAL mappings II Johannes Weiner
2008-10-21 22:13 ` Andrew Morton
2008-10-22 0:09 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-22 0:51 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-22 6:39 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-10-22 7:15 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-22 7:41 ` Andrew Morton
2008-10-24 0:21 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-24 12:55 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-10-24 14:02 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-24 14:31 ` Rik van Riel
2008-10-24 16:15 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-24 23:48 ` Johannes Weiner
2008-10-24 18:59 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-10-21 14:40 ` [rfc] mm: more likely reclaim MADV_SEQUENTIAL mappings Rik van Riel
2008-10-21 15:20 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
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=874p36gekt.fsf@saeurebad.de \
--to=hannes@saeurebad.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--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.