[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] beat kswapd with the proverbial clue-bat
Nick Piggin wrote:
> David S. Miller wrote:
>> On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 15:44:18 +1000
>> Nick Piggin <> wrote:
>>> So my solution? Just teach kswapd and the watermark code about higher
>>> order allocations in a fairly simple way. If pages_low is (say), 1024KB,
>>> we now also require 512KB of order-1 and above pages, 256K of order-2
>>> and up, 128K of order 3, etc. (perhaps we should stop at about order-3?)
>> Whether to stop at order 3 is indeed an interesting question.
>> The reality is that the high-order allocations come mostly from folks
>> using jumbo 9K MTUs on gigabit and faster technologies. On x86, an
>> order 2 would cover those packet allocations, but on sparc64 for example
>> order 1 would be enough, whereas on a 2K PAGE_SIZE system order 3 would
>> be necessary.
> Yeah I see.

Hmm, and the crowning argument for not stopping at order 3 is that if we
never use higher order allocations, nothing will care about their watermarks
anyway. I think I had myself confused when that question in the first place.

So yeah, stopping at a fixed number isn't required, and as you say it keeps
things general and special cases minimal.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:05    [W:0.084 / U:2.548 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site