From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [patch] Reset the high water marks in CPUs pcp list From: Rohit Seth In-Reply-To: <433B8E76.9080005@yahoo.com.au> References: <20050928105009.B29282@unix-os.sc.intel.com> <1127939185.5046.17.camel@akash.sc.intel.com> <1127943168.5046.39.camel@akash.sc.intel.com> <433B8E76.9080005@yahoo.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 09:34:19 -0700 Message-Id: <1128011659.3735.3.camel@akash.sc.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: Christoph Lameter , akpm@osdl.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Mattia Dongili , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, steiner@sgi.com List-ID: On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 16:49 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > I don't see that there would be any problems with playing with the > ->high and ->low numbers so long as they are a reasonable multiple > of batch, however I would question the merit of setting the high > watermark of the cold queue to ->batch + 1 (should really stay at > 2*batch IMO). > I agree that this watermark is little low at this point. But that is mainly because currently we don't have a way to drain the pcps for low memory conditions. Once I add that support, I will bump up the high water marks. Can you share a list of specific workloads that you ran earlier while fixing these numbers. -rohit -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org