Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Mon, 21 Jun 2004 00:45:25 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: Memory and rsync problem with vanilla 2.6.7 |
| |
Grzegorz Kulewski wrote: >>>Well it doesn't seem to have caused too much trouble as yet... But it >>>is the obvious candidate if your problems continue. If you are not a >>>bk user, the attached patch will also revert that change. >> >>Thanks, I will test it soon and I will report results. But I am not saying >>it is a bug - maybe it is simply change that can lead to problems with >>insane debug options but itself is good? > > > Are you sure that this is good patch against vanilla 2.6.7? It gives me > 2 failed hunks (both normal and -R)... Should I merge it manually? >
You're right here's the correct one. linux-2.6-npiggin/mm/vmscan.c | 7 ++----- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff -puN mm/vmscan.c~vm-revert-fix mm/vmscan.c --- linux-2.6/mm/vmscan.c~vm-revert-fix 2004-06-21 00:43:07.000000000 +1000 +++ linux-2.6-npiggin/mm/vmscan.c 2004-06-21 00:44:30.000000000 +1000 @@ -867,9 +867,8 @@ shrink_caches(struct zone **zones, struc for (i = 0; zones[i] != NULL; i++) { struct zone *zone = zones[i]; - zone->temp_priority = sc->priority; - if (zone->prev_priority > sc->priority) - zone->prev_priority = sc->priority; + if (zone->free_pages < zone->pages_high) + zone->temp_priority = priority; if (zone->all_unreclaimable && sc->priority != DEF_PRIORITY) continue; /* Let kswapd poll it */ @@ -1044,8 +1043,6 @@ scan: all_zones_ok = 0; } zone->temp_priority = priority; - if (zone->prev_priority > priority) - zone->prev_priority = priority; sc.nr_scanned = 0; sc.nr_reclaimed = 0; sc.priority = priority; _
| |