From: Rafael Aquini <aquini@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
loberman@redhat.com, Larry Woodman <lwoodman@redhat.com>,
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: readahead: get back a sensible upper limit
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 17:08:44 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150224220843.GL19014@t510.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFz4D9fS1xt7fg0R9Bnngg+_TbNs3fSAaFwoV7eTeLfP5Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 01:56:25PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 4:58 AM, Rafael Aquini <aquini@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > This patch brings back the old behavior of max_sane_readahead()
>
> Yeah no.
>
> There was a reason that code was killed. No way in hell are we
> bringing back the insanities with node memory etc.
>
Would you consider bringing it back, but instead of node memory state,
utilizing global memory state instead?
> Also, we have never actually heard of anything sane that actualyl
> depended on this. Last time this came up it was a made-up benchmark,
> not an actual real load that cared.
>
> Who can possibly care about this in real life?
>
People filing bugs complaining their applications that memory map files
are getting hurt by it.
-- Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-24 22:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-24 12:58 [PATCH] mm: readahead: get back a sensible upper limit Rafael Aquini
2015-02-24 20:50 ` David Rientjes
2015-02-24 21:13 ` Rafael Aquini
2015-02-24 21:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-02-24 22:08 ` Rafael Aquini [this message]
2015-02-24 22:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-02-24 22:54 ` Laurence Oberman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150224220843.GL19014@t510.redhat.com \
--to=aquini@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jweiner@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=loberman@redhat.com \
--cc=lwoodman@redhat.com \
--cc=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox