From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail202.messagelabs.com (mail202.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.227]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8DE26B00BA for ; Wed, 3 Nov 2010 13:17:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.227]) by e35.co.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id oA3H6Jhj009482 for ; Wed, 3 Nov 2010 11:06:19 -0600 Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (d03av04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.170]) by d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.1) with ESMTP id oA3HHZVA256766 for ; Wed, 3 Nov 2010 11:17:35 -0600 Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id oA3HHZk8026147 for ; Wed, 3 Nov 2010 11:17:35 -0600 Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 22:47:33 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/3] Linux/Guest unmapped page cache control Message-ID: <20101103171733.GP3769@balbir.in.ibm.com> Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20101028224002.32626.13015.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20101028224008.32626.69769.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Christoph Lameter Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-ID: * Christoph Lameter [2010-11-03 09:35:33]: > On Fri, 29 Oct 2010, Balbir Singh wrote: > > > A lot of the code is borrowed from zone_reclaim_mode logic for > > __zone_reclaim(). One might argue that the with ballooning and > > KSM this feature is not very useful, but even with ballooning, > > Interesting use of zone reclaim. I am having a difficult time reviewing > the patch since you move and modify functions at the same time. Could you > separate that out a bit? > Sure, I'll split it out into more readable bits and repost the mm versions first. > > +#define UNMAPPED_PAGE_RATIO 16 > > Maybe come up with a scheme that allows better configuration of the > mininum? I think in some setting we may want an absolute limit and in > other a fraction of something (total zone size or working set?) > Are you suggesting a sysctl or computation based on zone size and limit, etc? I understand it to be the latter. > > > +bool should_balance_unmapped_pages(struct zone *zone) > > +{ > > + if (unmapped_page_control && > > + (zone_unmapped_file_pages(zone) > > > + UNMAPPED_PAGE_RATIO * zone->min_unmapped_pages)) > > + return true; > > + return false; > > +} > Thanks for your review. -- Three Cheers, Balbir -- 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 policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org