From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 16:38:55 +0200 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH] VM: add vm.free_node_memory sysctl Message-ID: <20050803143855.GA10895@wotan.suse.de> References: <20050801113913.GA7000@elte.hu> <20050801102903.378da54f.akpm@osdl.org> <20050801195426.GA17548@elte.hu> <20050802171050.GG26803@localhost> <20050802210746.GA26494@elte.hu> <20050803135646.GO26803@localhost> <20050803141529.GX10895@wotan.suse.de> <20050803142440.GQ26803@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050803142440.GQ26803@localhost> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Martin Hicks Cc: Andi Kleen , Ingo Molnar , Linux MM , Andrew Morton , torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 10:24:40AM -0400, Martin Hicks wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 04:15:29PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 09:56:46AM -0400, Martin Hicks wrote: > > > > > > Here's the promised sysctl to dump a node's pagecache. Please review! > > > > > > This patch depends on the zone reclaim atomic ops cleanup: > > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-mm&m=112307646306476&w=2 > > > > Doesn't numactl --bind=node memhog nodesize-someslack do the same? > > > > It just might kick in the oom killer if someslack is too small > > or someone has unfreeable data there. But then there should be > > already an sysctl to turn that one off. > > Doesn't the memhog hack also cause the machine to swap a lot? The Hack? - compared to your "solutions" it looks very clean to me. > zone_reclaim() path doesn't let the memory reclaim code swap. reclaim with bound policy should only swap on the bound nodemask (or at least it did when I originally implemented NUMA policy) -Andi -- 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