![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On 1/25/07, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > Christoph Lameter wrote: > > On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote: > > > >> With your patch, MMAP of a file that will cross the pagecache limit hangs the > >> system. As I mentioned in my previous mail, without subtracting the > >> NR_FILE_MAPPED, the reclaim will infinitely try and fail. > > > > Well mapped pages are still pagecache pages. > > > > Yes, but they can be classified under a process RSS pages. Whether it > is an anon page or shared mem or mmap of pagecache, it would show up > under RSS. Those pages can be limited by RSS limiter similar to the > one we are discussing in pagecache limiter. In my opinion, once a > file page is mapped by the process, then it should be treated at par > with anon pages. Application programs generally do not mmap a file > page if the reuse for the content is very low. > I agree, we shouldn't take mmapped page into account. But Vaidy - even with your patch, we are still using the existing reclaimer, that means we dont ensure that only page cache is reclaimed/limited. mapped pages will be hit also. I think we still need to add a new scancontrol field to lock mmaped pages and remove unmapped pagecache pages only. -Aubrey - 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: 2007-01-25 07:23 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||