[lkml]   [1998]   [Oct]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch] my latest oom stuff

On Sun, 25 Oct 1998, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Hmm, it could be the shrink_mmap() shift factor that it' s too big too.
> But really, changing tries to tries/2 or decreasing of a *2 the
> shrink_mmap() path will make no big differences, the only important thing
> is to stop kswapd when it' s running all the time. As just said we can use
> a more sofisticate heuristic than mine ;-) to stop kswapd.

Actually, I'd prefer a _stupider_ approach, which would be to get rid of
"tries" altogether, and instead do:

unsigned long start = jiffies;

do {
.. swapout ..
} while (jiffies == start);

which essentially throttles kswapd to run at most one jiffy (and that in
turn pretty much guarantees that kswapd at MOST can ever run 50% of the
time, which is pretty close to the kind of guarantee we want).

Could you try the above simple approach?

I really think that being simple should work. Anything complex I wouldn't
ever trust in all circumstances.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:45    [W:0.103 / U:1.388 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site