![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 23:15:55 -0700 (PDT) Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> wrote: > On Thu, 29 Jun 2006, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > > > Did you consider my earlier suggestion about these counters? That, over the > > > short-term, they tend to count in only one direction? So we can do > > Uhh... We are overcompensating right? Pretty funky idea that is new to me > > and that would require some thought. > > > > This would basically increase the stepping by 50% if we are only going in > > one direction. > > A patch that does this: > > > ZVC: overcompensate while incrementing ZVC counters > > Overcompensate by a balance factor when incrementing or decrementing > ZVC counters anticipating continual increase in the same direction. Looks sensible. Please check that none of this is racy wrt memory hotplug (process_zones->vm_stat_setup). > Note that I have not been able to see any effect off this approach on > an 8p system where I tested this. > I probably will have a chance to test it on larger systems (160p) tomorrow. OK. But let's not rush - it's only fine-tuning. I'm thinking we should get what we have in -mm4 into -rc1 - I think it's stable enough, and we don't want to be carrying all those changes splatered across the VM for the next two months. Let's aim to get the well-measured fine-tuning in place for -rc2, OK? Are you aware of any to-do items remaining in the -mm4 patches? The NFS changes need a review from Trond - hopefully he'll be able to find 5-10 minutes to do that sometime? - 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/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-06-30 08:34 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||