From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from flecktone.americas.sgi.com (flecktone.americas.sgi.com [198.149.16.15]) by omx1.americas.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.9/linux-outbound_gateway-1.1) with ESMTP id j28LFdxT018733 for ; Tue, 8 Mar 2005 15:15:39 -0600 Received: from thistle-e236.americas.sgi.com (thistle-e236.americas.sgi.com [128.162.236.204]) by flecktone.americas.sgi.com (8.12.9/8.12.10/SGI_generic_relay-1.2) with ESMTP id j28LFcR03561901 for ; Tue, 8 Mar 2005 15:15:39 -0600 (CST) Received: from lnx-holt.americas.sgi.com (IDENT:U2FsdGVkX1+qjmsanoTvno4yeXJsW24qadrEijEA9Oo@lnx-holt.americas.sgi.com [128.162.233.109]) by thistle-e236.americas.sgi.com (8.12.9/SGI-server-1.8) with ESMTP id j28LFctC22332018 for ; Tue, 8 Mar 2005 15:15:38 -0600 (CST) Received: from lnx-holt.americas.sgi.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by lnx-holt.americas.sgi.com (8.13.1/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j28LFaRB016354 for ; Tue, 8 Mar 2005 15:15:38 -0600 Received: (from holt@localhost) by lnx-holt.americas.sgi.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id j28LFZqU016353 for linux-mm@kvack.org; Tue, 8 Mar 2005 15:15:35 -0600 Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 15:15:35 -0600 From: Robin Holt Subject: Is there a way to do an architecture specific shake of memory? Message-ID: <20050308211535.GB16061@lnx-holt.americas.sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: I am in the process of fixing the quicklist handling for the ia64 page tables. The problem we are running into is the quicklists are per-cpu. When memory is running short, the only current callout to shrink the quicklist is coming from cpu_idle(). The most recent suggestion is to schedule_delayed_work_on() for every cpu in the system and have them check to see if the quicklist needs to be shrunk. This feels wrong. What I would like to do is have wakup_kswapd(), kswapd() or balance_pdgat() do the actual call to smp_call_function_single() as needed to try to shrink the quicklists. This would need to be an ia64 only change. Is there already a method for the architecture to get control during any part of the process? If not, where would be the most acceptable place? Any suggestions are welcome. Thanks, Robin Holt -- 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