[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Removal of lumpy reclaim
On 04/06/2012 04:31 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Apr 2012, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 17:06:21 +0100
>> Mel Gorman<> wrote:
>>> (cc'ing active people in the thread "[patch 68/92] mm: forbid lumpy-reclaim
>>> in shrink_active_list()")
>>> In the interest of keeping my fingers from the flames at LSF/MM, I'm
>>> releasing an RFC for lumpy reclaim removal.
>> I grabbed them, thanks.
> I do have a concern with this: I was expecting lumpy reclaim to be
> replaced by compaction, and indeed it is when CONFIG_COMPACTION=y.
> But when CONFIG_COMPACTION is not set, we're back to 2.6.22 in
> relying upon blind chance to provide order>0 pages.

Is this an issue for any architecture?

I could see NOMMU being unable to use compaction, but
chances are lumpy reclaim would be sufficient for that
configuration, anyway...

All rights reversed

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-09 20:13    [W:0.059 / U:14.852 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site