lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] low order lumpy reclaim also should use PAGEOUT_IO_SYNC.
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 16:21:18 +0900 (JST)
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:

> > Hi, Kosaki-san.
> >
> > On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:22:27 +0900 (JST)
> > KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Subject: [PATCH] low order lumpy reclaim also should use PAGEOUT_IO_SYNC.
> > >
> > > commit 33c120ed2843090e2bd316de1588b8bf8b96cbde (more aggressively use lumpy reclaim)
> > > change lumpy reclaim using condition. but it isn't enough change.
> > >
> > > lumpy reclaim don't only mean isolate neighber page, but also do pageout as synchronous.
> > > this patch does it.
> >
> > I agree.
> >
> > Andi added synchronous lumpy reclaim with c661b078fd62abe06fd11fab4ac5e4eeafe26b6d.
> > At that time, lumpy reclaim is not agressive.
> > His intension is just for high-order users.(above PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER).
> >
> > After some time, Rik added aggressive lumpy reclaim with 33c120ed2843090e2bd316de1588b8bf8b96cbde.
> > His intension is that do lumpy reclaim when high-order users and trouble getting a small set of contiguous pages.
> >
> > So we also have to add synchronous pageout for small set of contiguous pages.
> > Nice catch!.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <Minchan.kim@gmail.com>
> >
> > BTW, Do you have any number ?
>
> No.
>
> Actually, this logic only run when system is strongly memory stavation
> or fragment. not normal case.
>
> At that time, another slowdown thing hide synchronous reclaim latency, I think.
>

Yes. I think it's hard measure, too.
I was just out of curiosity if server guy have a any benchmark method. ;-)


--
Kinds Regards
Minchan Kim


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-04-21 09:43    [W:0.048 / U:0.380 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site