From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 02:12:31 +0100 From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [PATCH 15 of 24] limit reclaim if enough pages have been freed Message-ID: <20080103011231.GM30939@v2.random> References: <94686cfcd27347e83a6a.1187786942@v2.random> <20070912055723.c4f79f9a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070912055723.c4f79f9a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, David Rientjes List-ID: On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 05:57:23AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > whoa, that's a huge change to the scanning logic. Suppose we've decided to > scan 1,000,000 active pages and 42 inactive pages. With this change we'll > bale out after scanning the 42 inactive pages. The change to the > inactive/active balancing logic is potentially large. Could be, but I don't think it's good to do such an overwork on large ram systems when freeing swap-cluster-max pages is enough to guarantee we're not getting spurious oom. It's a latency issue only here (not RT at all, but still a latency issue). Anyway feel free to keep this out. It's mostly independent from the rest. -- 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