From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: -mm merge plans -- anti-fragmentation From: Peter Zijlstra In-Reply-To: <20070710102043.GA20303@skynet.ie> References: <20070710102043.GA20303@skynet.ie> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 13:04:05 +0200 Message-Id: <1184065445.5281.16.camel@lappy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Mel Gorman Cc: Andrew Morton , npiggin@suse.de, kenchen@google.com, jschopp@austin.ibm.com, apw@shadowen.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com, clameter@sgi.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 11:20 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > lumpy-reclaim-v4.patch > > This patch is really what lumpy reclaim is. I believe Peter has looked > at this and was happy enough at the time although he is cc'd here again > in case this has changed. This is mainly useful with either grouping > pages by mobility or the ZONE_MOVABLE stuff. However, at the time the > patch was proposed, there was a feeling that it might help jumbo frame > allocation on e1000's and maybe if fsblock optimistically uses > contiguous pages it would have an application. I would like to see it go > through to see does it help e1000 at least. I'm not seeing how this will help e1000 (and other jumbo drivers). They typically allocate using GFP_ATOMIC, so in order to satisfy those you'd need to either have a higher order watermark or do atomic defrag of the free space. -- 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