Re: [PATCH 0/3] Fix malloc() stall in zone_reclaim() and bring behaviour more in line with expectations V3

[Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 07:06:46PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > 
> > > I don't have a particular workload in mind to be perfectly honest. I'm just not
> > > convinced of the wisdom of trying to unmap pages by default in zone_reclaim()
> > > just because the NUMA distances happen to be large.
> > 
> > zone reclaim = 1 is supposed to be light weight with minimal impact. The
> > intend was just to remove potentially unused pagecache pages so that node
> > local allocations can succeed again. So lets not unmap pages.
> 
> hm, At least major two zone reclaim developer disagree my patch. Thus I have to
> agree with you, because I really don't hope to ignore other developer's opnion.
> 
> So, as far as I understand, the conclusion of this thread are
>   - Drop my patch
>   - instead, implement improvement patch of (may_unmap && page_mapped()) case
>   - the documentation should be changed
>   - it's my homework(?)
> 
> Can you agree this?
> 

Yes.

-- 
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student                          Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick                         IBM Dublin Software Lab

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>