Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 17 Jul 2001 20:56:19 -0700 (PDT) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: Inclusion of zoned inactive/free shortage patch |
| |
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > > > Do you have any really compelling reasons for adding the zone parameter to > > swap-out? > > Avoid the page-faults and unecessary swap space allocation.
In that case, what's the argument for not just replacing the zone parameter with
/* If we have enough free pages in this zone, don't bother */ if (page->zone->nrpages > page->zone->high) return;
which works without having a silly single-zone special case (think multiple small zones, all under pressure, and one large zone that hasn't seen pressure in ages).
A single-zone parameter just looks fundamentally broken. How do you determine "which zone"? All allocations are really about zone _lists_, not single zones.
This same test (maybe nicely abstraced with something like a "page_zone_pressure(page)" inline function) makes sense in pretty much all the scanning functions. We want to _age_ the pages in such zones, but we may not actually want to do anything further.
Comments?
Linus
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |