Rik van Riel's vm-rmap

Rik van Riel's vm-rmap

[Louis Garcia]

Does he still use classzones as the basis for the vm? I thought that
linux was trying to get away from classzones for better NUMA support in
2.5??

--Louis

Re: Rik van Riel's vm-rmap

[William Lee Irwin III]

On Sun, Jan 27, 2002 at 11:56:50PM -0500, Louis Garcia wrote:
> Does he still use classzones as the basis for the vm? I thought that
> linux was trying to get away from classzones for better NUMA support in
> 2.5??

rmap does not use the classzone concept.


Cheers,
Bill

Re: Rik van Riel's vm-rmap

[Rik van Riel]

On 27 Jan 2002, Louis Garcia wrote:

> Does he still use classzones as the basis for the vm? I thought that
> linux was trying to get away from classzones for better NUMA support in
> 2.5??

Nope.  I've done a few modifications:

1) the IMHO inflexible classzone stuff has been removed

2) we have reverse mappings, so we can do our pageout
   scan by physical address

3) this in turn means the active, inactive_dirty and
   inactive_clean lists are per zone ... allowing us
   to scan only in those zones where we actually need
   to free pages

regards,

Rik
-- 
"Linux holds advantages over the single-vendor commercial OS"
    -- Microsoft's "Competing with Linux" document

http://www.surriel.com/		http://distro.conectiva.com/

Re: Rik van Riel's vm-rmap

[Louis Garcia]

Does this patch work well with Andrew's low-latency patch?

--Louis


On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 03:21, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 27 Jan 2002, Louis Garcia wrote:
> 
> > Does he still use classzones as the basis for the vm? I thought that
> > linux was trying to get away from classzones for better NUMA support in
> > 2.5??
> 
> Nope.  I've done a few modifications:
> 
> 1) the IMHO inflexible classzone stuff has been removed
> 
> 2) we have reverse mappings, so we can do our pageout
>    scan by physical address
> 
> 3) this in turn means the active, inactive_dirty and
>    inactive_clean lists are per zone ... allowing us
>    to scan only in those zones where we actually need
>    to free pages
> 
> regards,
> 
> Rik
> -- 
> "Linux holds advantages over the single-vendor commercial OS"
>     -- Microsoft's "Competing with Linux" document
> 
> http://www.surriel.com/		http://distro.conectiva.com/
> 

Re: Rik van Riel's vm-rmap

[Robert Love]

On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 19:07, Louis Garcia wrote:
> Does this patch work well with Andrew's low-latency patch?

There will be failed hunks in the VM code (specifically vmscan.c), but
you can safely ignore them.  So, yes, it works.

	Robert Love

Re: Rik van Riel's vm-rmap

[Louis Garcia]

Should I do the rmap patch first?

--Louis

On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 19:12, Robert Love wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 19:07, Louis Garcia wrote:
> > Does this patch work well with Andrew's low-latency patch?
> 
> There will be failed hunks in the VM code (specifically vmscan.c), but
> you can safely ignore them.  So, yes, it works.
> 
> 	Robert Love
> 

Re: Rik van Riel's vm-rmap

[Rik van Riel]

On 28 Jan 2002, Louis Garcia wrote:

> Should I do the rmap patch first?

Yes.

After that you can patch the low latency patch,
which will give you a reject on vmscan.c

This doesn't matter because:
1) each part of the low latency patch is independant
2) -rmap already has low latency code in vmscan.c

kind regards,

Rik
-- 
"Linux holds advantages over the single-vendor commercial OS"
    -- Microsoft's "Competing with Linux" document

http://www.surriel.com/		http://distro.conectiva.com/

Re: Rik van Riel's vm-rmap

[Robert Love]

On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 19:14, Louis Garcia wrote:
> Should I do the rmap patch first?

Yes, if Andrew's low-latency patch fails you just lose the scheduling
points in vmscan.c (big deal).  If rmap half applies... ouch.

So apply rmap first.

	Robert Love

Re: Rik van Riel's vm-rmap

[Louis Garcia]

Ok, has anyone ported the latest patch to 2.4.18-pre7 yet??

--Louis


On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 19:15, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 28 Jan 2002, Louis Garcia wrote:
> 
> > Should I do the rmap patch first?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> After that you can patch the low latency patch,
> which will give you a reject on vmscan.c
> 
> This doesn't matter because:
> 1) each part of the low latency patch is independant
> 2) -rmap already has low latency code in vmscan.c
> 
> kind regards,
> 
> Rik
> -- 
> "Linux holds advantages over the single-vendor commercial OS"
>     -- Microsoft's "Competing with Linux" document
> 
> http://www.surriel.com/		http://distro.conectiva.com/
> 

Re: Rik van Riel's vm-rmap

[Alex Davis]

Assuming you're talking about rmap12a, yes. 
on http://www.dynamicbullet.com/rmap.html
there's a link to a patch that adds rmap
to 2.4.18pre7


-Alex

>Ok, has anyone ported the latest patch to 2.4.18-pre7 yet??
>
>--Louis




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com