Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 23 Feb 2004 11:54:57 +1100 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: Large slab cache in 2.6.1 |
| |
Andrew Morton wrote:
>Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au> wrote: > > >>This is the incremental min logic doing its work though. Maybe >>that should be fixed up to be less aggressive instead of putting >>more complexity in the scanner to work around it. >> > >The scanner got simpler. > > >>Anyway could you post the patch you're using to fix it? >> > >Sure. > > >>>Regardless of that, we do, logically, want to reclaim slab in response to >>>highmem reclaim pressure because any highmem allocation can be satisfied by >>>lowmem too. >>> >>> >>> >>The logical extension of that is: "we want to reclaim *lowmem* in >>response to highmem reclaim pressure because any ..." >> > >yep. > >
Yeah this is good. I thought the patch you were proposing was to shrink slab on highmem pressure.
Apply some lowmem pressure due to highmem pressure THEN shrink slab as a result of the lowmem pressure is much better.
- 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/
| |