Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 09 Jul 2004 11:05:44 +1000 | From | Con Kolivas <> | Subject | Re: Autoregulate swappiness & inactivation |
| |
FabF wrote: > Con, > What's interesting is try_to_free_pages comment : > > " the zone may be full of dirty or under-writeback pages, which this > * caller can't do much about. We kick pdflush and take explicit naps > in the > * hope that some of these pages can be written. But if the allocating > task..." > > I mean do we have high activity profile of that side of the kernel when > bringing up some big application to life ? > Does work consist here in 50% out, 50% in (time) ? Your anticipation > algorithm can help the "in" side but maybe we can optimize yet the "out" > side.btw, I'm surprised to see autoswappiness so far in fx tree: > > page_reclaim > try_to_free_pages > shrink_caches > shrink_zone > refill_inactive_zone > auto_swap calculation > > > IOW, does such parameter could not involve more decisions ?
If you put it that way, yes - it would classify as duct tape. However the code already acted based upon mapped_ratio which is pretty much all this patch does. Folded in in that sample patch I sent out earlier you can see that all it does is acted on mapped_ratio in a different manner so it's not really an extra layer at all.
- swap_tendency = mapped_ratio / 2 + distress + vm_swappiness; + vm_swappiness = mapped_ratio * 150 / 100; + vm_swappiness = vm_swappiness * vm_swappiness / 150; + swap_tendency = distress + vm_swappiness;
Con
> Regards, > FabF [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |