lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/5] page allocator: Pre-emptively wake kswapd when high-order watermarks are hit
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 01:31:10PM +0200, Tobias Oetiker wrote:
> Mel,
>
> Today Mel Gorman wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 02:36:53AM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> > > On Fri, 23 Oct 2009, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Hmm, is this really supposed to be added to __alloc_pages_high_priority()?
> > > > > By the patch description I was expecting kswapd to be woken up
> > > > > preemptively whenever the preferred zone is below ALLOC_WMARK_LOW and
> > > > > we're known to have just allocated at a higher order, not just when
> > > > > current was oom killed (when we should already be freeing a _lot_ of
> > > > > memory soon) or is doing a higher order allocation during direct reclaim.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > It was a somewhat arbitrary choice to have it trigger in the event high
> > > > priority allocations were happening frequently.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I don't quite understand, users of PF_MEMALLOC shouldn't be doing these
> > > higher order allocations and if ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS is by way of the oom
> > > killer, we should be freeing a substantial amount of memory imminently
> > > when it exits that waking up kswapd would be irrelevant.
> > >
> >
> > I agree. I think it's highly unlikely this patch will make any
> > difference but I wanted to eliminate it as a possibility. Patch 3 and 4
> > were previously one patch that were tested together.
>
> hi hi ... I have tested '3 only' this morning, and the allocation
> problems started again ... so for me 3 alone does not work while
> 3+4 does.
>

Hi,

What was the outcome of 1+2?

--
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-23 15:41    [W:0.130 / U:0.296 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site