From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 13:12:07 -0800 From: Bill Irwin Subject: Re: The performance and behaviour of the anti-fragmentation related patches Message-ID: <20070302211207.GJ10643@holomorphy.com> References: <20070301101249.GA29351@skynet.ie> <20070301160915.6da876c5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <45E842F6.5010105@redhat.com> <20070302085838.bcf9099e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070302093501.34c6ef2a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <45E8624E.2080001@redhat.com> <20070302100619.cec06d6a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <45E86BA0.50508@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <45E86BA0.50508@redhat.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Rik van Riel Cc: Christoph Lameter , Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , npiggin@suse.de, mingo@elte.hu, jschopp@austin.ibm.com, arjan@infradead.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mbligh@mbligh.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 01:23:28PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > With 32 CPUs diving into the page reclaim simultaneously, > each trying to scan a fraction of memory, this is disastrous > for performance. A 256GB system should be even worse. Thundering herds of a sort pounding the LRU locks from direct reclaim have set off the NMI oopser for users here. -- wli -- 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: email@kvack.org