From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail6.bemta12.messagelabs.com (mail6.bemta12.messagelabs.com [216.82.250.247]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5508C6B0012 for ; Sun, 29 May 2011 04:16:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d23relay04.au.ibm.com (d23relay04.au.ibm.com [202.81.31.246]) by e23smtp09.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p4T8GOpV021970 for ; Sun, 29 May 2011 18:16:24 +1000 Received: from d23av01.au.ibm.com (d23av01.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.96]) by d23relay04.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p4T8Ftoi1061102 for ; Sun, 29 May 2011 18:15:55 +1000 Received: from d23av01.au.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d23av01.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p4T8GOL4008732 for ; Sun, 29 May 2011 18:16:24 +1000 Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 13:46:18 +0530 From: Ankita Garg Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] mm: Introduce the memory regions data structure Message-ID: <20110529081618.GC8333@in.ibm.com> Reply-To: Ankita Garg References: <1306499498-14263-1-git-send-email-ankita@in.ibm.com> <1306499498-14263-2-git-send-email-ankita@in.ibm.com> <1306510203.22505.69.camel@nimitz> <20110527182041.GM5654@dirshya.in.ibm.com> <1306531912.22505.84.camel@nimitz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1306531912.22505.84.camel@nimitz> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Dave Hansen Cc: svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, thomas.abraham@linaro.org Hi Dave, On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 02:31:52PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On Fri, 2011-05-27 at 23:50 +0530, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: > > The overall idea is to have a VM data structure that can capture > > various boundaries of memory, and enable the allocations and reclaim > > logic to target certain areas based on the boundaries and properties > > required. > > It's worth noting that we already do targeted reclaim on boundaries > other than zones. The lumpy reclaim and memory compaction logically do > the same thing. So, it's at least possible to do this without having > the global LRU designed around the way you want to reclaim. > My understanding maybe incorrect, but doesn't both lumpy reclaim and memory compaction still work under zone boundary ? While trying to free up higher order pages, lumpy reclaim checks to ensure that pages that are selected do not cross zone boundary. Further, compaction walks through the pages in a zone and tries to re-arrange them. > Also, if you get _too_ dependent on the global LRU, what are you going > to do if our cgroup buddies manage to get cgroup'd pages off the global > LRU? > -- Regards, Ankita Garg (ankita@in.ibm.com) Linux Technology Center IBM India Systems & Technology Labs, Bangalore, India -- 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