From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail6.bemta8.messagelabs.com (mail6.bemta8.messagelabs.com [216.82.243.55]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A31A46B0025 for ; Tue, 24 May 2011 16:37:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e2.ny.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p4OKH7w4024215 for ; Tue, 24 May 2011 16:17:07 -0400 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (d03av03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.169]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p4OKb77E066382 for ; Tue, 24 May 2011 16:37:07 -0400 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p4OEb5is009447 for ; Tue, 24 May 2011 08:37:06 -0600 Subject: Re: [PATCH resend^2] mm: increase RECLAIM_DISTANCE to 30 From: Dave Hansen In-Reply-To: <20110524130700.079b09e8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20110411172004.0361.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <1302557371.7286.16607.camel@nimitz> <20110412100129.43F1.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <1302575241.7286.17853.camel@nimitz> <20110524130700.079b09e8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 13:37:04 -0700 Message-ID: <1306269424.22505.20.camel@nimitz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro , LKML , linux-mm , Christoph Lameter , David Rientjes , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Chris McDermott On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 13:07 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 19:27:21 -0700 > Dave Hansen wrote: > > I'll go try and dig for some more specifics on the hardware so we at > > least have something to test on. > > How's that digging coming along? > > I'm pretty wobbly about this patch. Perhaps we should set > RECLAIM_DISTANCE to pi/2 or something, to force people to correctly set > the dang thing in initscripts. The original change in the hardware tables was for the benefit of a benchmark. Said benchmark isn't going to get run on mainline until the next batch of enterprise distros drops, at which point the hardware where this was done will be irrelevant for the benchmark. I'm sure any new hardware will just set this distance to another yet arbitrary value to make the kernel do what it wants. :) Also, when the hardware got _set_ to this initially, I complained. So, I guess I'm getting my way now, with this patch. I'm cool with it: Acked-by: Dave Hansen -- Dave -- 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: email@kvack.org