Re: [RFC][PATCH 9/9] make kvm mmu shrinker more aggressive

Avi Kivity
2010-07-22T04:36:17Z

On 06/22/2010 07:32 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-06-20 at 11:11 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>>> That changes a few things. I bet all the contention we were seeing was
>>> just from nr_to_scan=0 calls and not from actual shrink operations.
>>> Perhaps we should just stop this set after patch 4.
>>>
>>>
>> At the very least, we should re-measure things.
>>
> Sure. I'll go back to the folks that found this in the first place and
> see how these patches affect the contention we were seeing.
>

Dave, how did those tests go?

--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.