[lkml]   [2011]   [Oct]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH -v2 -mm] add extra free kbytes tunable
On 10/12/2011 03:20 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 09:09:17 -0400
> Rik van Riel<> wrote:

>> The problem is that we may be dealing with bursts, not steady
>> states of allocations. Without knowing the size of a burst,
>> we have no idea when we should wake up kswapd to get enough
>> memory freed ahead of the application's allocations.
> That problem remains with this patch - it just takes a larger burst.
> Unless the admin somehow manages to configure the tunable large enough
> to cover the largest burst, and there aren't other applications
> allocating memory during that burst, and the time between bursts is
> sufficient for kswapd to be able to sufficiently replenish free-page
> reserves. All of which sounds rather unlikely.

It depends on the system. For a setup which is packed to
the brim with workloads, this patch is not likely to help.
On the other hand, on a system that is packed to the brim
with workloads, you are unlikely to get low latencies anyway.

For situations where people really care about low latencies,
I imagine having dedicated hardware for a workload is not at
all unusual, and the patch works for that.

>>> Look, please don't go bending over backwards like this to defend a bad
>>> patch. It's a bad patch! It would be better not to have to merge it.
>>> Let's do something better.
>> I would love it if we could come up with something better,
>> and have thought about it a lot.
>> However, so far we do not seem to have an alternative yet :(
> Do we actually have a real-world application which is hurting from
> this?


 \ /
  Last update: 2011-10-12 22:01    [W:0.061 / U:6.240 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site