[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Add __GFP_MOVABLE for callers to flag allocations that may be migrated
On (05/12/06 12:01), Christoph Lameter didst pronounce:
> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > We always run reclaim against the whole zone not against parts. Why
> > > would we start running reclaim against a portion of a zone?
> >
> > Oh for gawd's sake.
> Yes indeed. Another failure to answer a simple question.

There are times you want to reclaim just part of a zone - specifically
satisfying a high-order allocations. See sitations 1 and 2 from elsewhere
in this thread. On a similar vein, there will be times when you want to
migrate a PFN range for similar reasons.

> > If you want to allocate a page from within the first 1/4 of a zone, and if
> > all those pages are in use for something else then you'll need to run
> > reclaim against the first 1/4 of that zone. Or fail the allocation. Or
> > run reclaim against the entire zone. The second two options are
> > self-evidently dumb.
> Why would one want to allocate from the 1/4th of a zone? (Are we still
> discussing Mel's antifrag scheme or what is this about?)

Because you wanted contiguous blocks of pages. This is related to anti-frag
because with anti-frag, reclaiming memory or migration memory will free up
contiguous blocks. Without it, you're probably wasting your time.

Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab
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: 2006-12-05 22:49    [W:0.055 / U:4.980 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site