From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx118.postini.com [74.125.245.118]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5DAB06B007E for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:56:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4F85C813.2050206@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:06:11 -0400 From: Rik van Riel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Removal of lumpy reclaim V2 References: <1334162298-18942-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <4F85BC8E.3020400@redhat.com> <20120411175215.GI3789@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20120411175215.GI3789@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Mel Gorman Cc: Andrew Morton , Konstantin Khlebnikov , Hugh Dickins , Ying Han , Linux-MM , LKML On 04/11/2012 01:52 PM, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 01:17:02PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: >> Next step: get rid of __GFP_NO_KSWAPD for THP, first >> in the -mm kernel >> > > Initially the flag was introduced because kswapd reclaimed too > aggressively. One would like to believe that it would be less of a problem > now but we must avoid a situation where the CPU and reclaim cost of kswapd > exceeds the benefit of allocating a THP. Since kswapd and the direct reclaim code now use the same conditionals for calling compaction, the cost ought to be identical. I agree this is something we should shake out in -mm for a while though, before considering a mainline merge. Andrew, would you be willing to take a removal of __GFP_NO_KSWAPD in -mm, and push it to Linus for the 3.6 kernel if no ill effects are seen in -mm and -next? -- 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