From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bernd Schmidt Subject: Re: [00/41] Large Blocksize Support V7 (adds memmap support) Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:10:57 +0200 Message-ID: <46EE60C1.7030507@t-online.de> References: <20070911060349.993975297@sgi.com> <200709111606.10873.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <200709120407.48344.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Nick Piggin , Mel Gorman , andrea@suse.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Mel Gorman , William Lee Irwin III , David Chinner , Jens Axboe , Badari Pulavarty , Maxim Levitsky , Fengguang Wu , swin wang , totty.lu@gmail.com, hugh@veritas.com, joern@lazybastard.org To: Christoph Lameter Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org Christoph Lameter wrote: > True. That is why we want to limit the number of unmovable allocations and > that is why ZONE_MOVABLE exists to limit those. However, unmovable > allocations are already rare today. The overwhelming majority of > allocations are movable and reclaimable. You can see that f.e. by looking > at /proc/meminfo and see how high SUnreclaim: is (does not catch > everything but its a good indicator). Just to inject another factor into the discussion, please remember that Linux also runs on nommu systems, where things like user space allocations are neither movable nor reclaimable. Bernd -- This footer brought to you by insane German lawmakers. Analog Devices GmbH Wilhelm-Wagenfeld-Str. 6 80807 Muenchen Sitz der Gesellschaft Muenchen, Registergericht Muenchen HRB 40368 Geschaeftsfuehrer Thomas Wessel, William A. Martin, Margaret Seif