Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 11 Sep 2014 06:25:09 -0700 (PDT) | From | Hugh Dickins <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] ksm: provide support to use deferrable timers for scanner thread |
| |
On Thu, 11 Sep 2014, Chintan Pandya wrote:
> I don't mean to divert the thread too much. But just one suggestion offered > by Harshad. > > Why can't we stop invoking more of a KSM scanner thread when we are > saturating from savings ? But again, to check whether savings are saturated > or not, we may still want to rely upon timers and we have to wake the CPUs up > from IDLE state.
I agree that it should make sense for KSM to slow down when it sees it's making no progress (though that would depart from the pages_to_scan and sleep_millisecs prescription - perhaps could be tied to sleep_millisecs 0).
But not stop. That's the problem we're mainly concerned with here: to save power we need it to stop, but then how to wake up, without putting nasty hooks in hot paths for a minority interest? I don't see an answer to that above.
Hugh
| |