From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 17:14:37 +0100 Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.23-rc1-mm1 - fix missing numa_zonelist_order sysctl Message-ID: <20070802161437.GA22493@skynet.ie> References: <1185994972.5059.91.camel@localhost> <20070802094445.6495e25d.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070802094445.6495e25d.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> From: mel@skynet.ie (Mel Gorman) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: Lee Schermerhorn , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel , linux-mm , Christoph Lameter List-ID: On (02/08/07 09:44), KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki didst pronounce: > On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 15:02:51 -0400 > Lee Schermerhorn wrote: > > [But, maybe reordering the zonelists is not such a good idea > > when ZONE_MOVABLE is populated?] > > > > It's case-by-case I think. In zone order with ZONE_MOVABLE case, > user's page cache will not use ZONE_NORMAL until ZONE_MOVABLE in all node > is exhausted. This is an expected behavior, I think. > This is expected behaviour. I see no reason for lower zones to be used for allocations that use memory from a higher zone with free memory. > I think the real problem is the scheme for "How to set zone movable size to > appropriate value for the system". This needs more study and documentation. > (but maybe depends on system configuration to some extent.) > It depends on the system configuration and the workload requirements. Right now, there isn't exact information available on what size the zone should be. It'll need to be studied over a period of time. -- Mel Gorman Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab -- 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