From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 08:18:01 -0200 From: Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] higher order watermarks Message-ID: <20041111101801.GB15358@logos.cnet> References: <417F5584.2070400@yahoo.com.au> <417F55B9.7090306@yahoo.com.au> <417F5604.3000908@yahoo.com.au> <20041104085745.GA7186@logos.cnet> <20041110162311.GA12696@logos.cnet> <4192C32E.6070001@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4192C32E.6070001@yahoo.com.au> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux Memory Management List-ID: On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 12:41:02PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > >On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 06:57:45AM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > > > > >>The original code didnt had the can_try_harder/gfp_high decrease > >>which is now on zone_watermark_ok. > >> > >>Means that those allocations will now be successful earlier, instead > >>of going to the next zonelist iteration. kswapd will not be awake > >>when it used to be. > >> > >>Hopefully it doesnt matter that much. You did this by intention? > > > > > >Another thing Nick is that now balance_pgdat uses zone_watermark_ok, > >and that sums "z->protection[alloc_type]". > > > > if (free_pages <= min + z->protection[alloc_type]) > > return 0; > > > >Since balance_pgdat calls with alloc_type=0, the code will sum ZONE_DMA > >(alloc_type = 0) protection, and it should not. > > > >kswapd should be working on the bare min/low/high watermarks AFAICT, > >without the protections. > > > >Comments? > > > > > > Yeah.. I think z->protection[0] should always be 0, shouldn't it? Oh yes, fine. > I was just hesitant to add another parameter to the function and > have yet another case to check. -- 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