From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 10:52:34 -0700 From: William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: Kernel 2.6.8.1: swap storm of death - nr_requests > 1024 on swap partition Message-ID: <20040829175234.GQ5492@holomorphy.com> References: <412E13DB.6040102@seagha.com> <412E31EE.3090102@pandora.be> <41308C62.7030904@seagha.com> <20040828125028.2fa2a12b.akpm@osdl.org> <4130F55A.90705@pandora.be> <20040828144303.0ae2bebe.akpm@osdl.org> <20040828215411.GY5492@holomorphy.com> <20040828151349.00f742f4.akpm@osdl.org> <20040828222816.GZ5492@holomorphy.com> <20040829165458.GD11219@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040829165458.GD11219@suse.de> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Jens Axboe Cc: Andrew Morton , karl.vogel@pandora.be, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Sat, Aug 28 2004, William Lee Irwin III wrote: >> It certainly appears to be the deciding factor from the thread. On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 06:54:59PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > Has nothing to do with the io scheduler itself, apart from the fact that > CFQ exposes the problem by setting a larger q->nr_requests. And that is > the very deciding factor, not the io scheduler. Then it's narrower still, q->nr_requests. What a priori reasons are there for this to vomit? clear_queue_congested() seems to be called only when a request is retired, so a large number of requests in flight may be doing something unexpected, and I'd expect large q->nr_requests to keep large numbers of requests around. Hmm... -- wli -- 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: aart@kvack.org