Re: [PATCH 14/14] page-replace-kswapd-incmin.patch
- From: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 23:15:07 -0200
On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 11:42:34PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx>
>
> Explicitly teach kswapd about the incremental min logic instead of just scanning
> all zones under the first low zone. This should keep more even pressure applied
> on the zones.
>
> The new shrink_zone() logic exposes the very worst side of the current
> balance_pgdat() function. Without this patch reclaim is limited to ZONE_DMA.
Can you please describe the issue with over protection of DMA zone you experienced?
I'll see if I can reproduce it with Nick's standalone patch on top of vanilla, what
load was that?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 14/14] page-replace-kswapd-incmin.patch
- From: Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH 14/14] page-replace-kswapd-incmin.patch
- References:
- [PATCH] vm: page-replace and clockpro
- From: Peter Zijlstra
- [PATCH 14/14] page-replace-kswapd-incmin.patch
- From: Peter Zijlstra
- [PATCH] vm: page-replace and clockpro
- Prev by Date: Re: [POLL] SLAB : Are the 32 and 192 bytes caches really usefull on x86_64 machines ?
- Next by Date: Re: [patch] latency tracer, 2.6.15-rc7
- Previous by thread: [PATCH 14/14] page-replace-kswapd-incmin.patch
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 14/14] page-replace-kswapd-incmin.patch
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|