From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [PATCH] earlier allocation of order 0 pages from pcp in __alloc_pages From: Rohit Seth In-Reply-To: <20050929161118.27f9f1eb.akpm@osdl.org> References: <20050929150155.A15646@unix-os.sc.intel.com> <719460000.1128034108@[10.10.2.4]> <20050929161118.27f9f1eb.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 18:58:25 -0700 Message-Id: <1128045505.3735.31.camel@akash.sc.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: "Martin J. Bligh" , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Martin Hicks List-ID: On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 16:11 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > "Martin J. Bligh" wrote: > > > > It looks like we're now dropping into direct reclaim as the first thing > > in __alloc_pages before even trying to kick off kswapd. When the hell > > did that start? Or is that only meant to trigger if we're already below > > the low watermark level? > > That's all the numa goop which Martin Hicks added. It's all disabled if > z->reclaim_pages is zero (it is). However we could be testing that flag a > bit earlier, I think. > > And yeah, some de-spaghettification would be nice. Certainly before adding > more logic. > > Martin, should we take out the early zone reclaim logic? It's all > unreachable at present anyway. > ...yeah just like sys_set_zone_reclaim. was it intended to be added as a system call? -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