From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 17:59:20 -0700 From: William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: vm lock contention reduction Message-ID: <20020708005920.GD25360@holomorphy.com> References: <3D26304C.51FAE560@zip.com.au> <3D263E70.7B8F5307@zip.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Description: brief message Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3D263E70.7B8F5307@zip.com.au> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Rik van Riel , Andrea Arcangeli , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , Linus Torvalds List-ID: Rik van Riel wrote: >> But it is, mmap() and anonymous memory don't trigger writeback. On Fri, Jul 05, 2002 at 05:48:48PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > That's different. Bill hit a problem just running tiobench. > We can run balance_dirty_pages() when a COW copyout is performed, > which will approximately improve things. > But the whole idea of the dirty memory thresholds just seems bust, > really. Because how do you pick the thresholds? 40%. Bah. I don't know what the answer should be, but I can certainly demonstrate this in a rather uninteresting situation (4GB, 4cpu's, 1 disk, 16 tasks). But I can concur with that evaluation. In my esteem fixed fractions of memory don't have a very direct relationship to what's going on. Cheers, Bill -- 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/