From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:20:56 +0900 From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/5] add /dev/mem_notify device In-Reply-To: <20080115111035.d516639a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20080115100029.1178.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> <20080115111035.d516639a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-Id: <20080115110918.118B.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Marcelo Tosatti , Daniel Spang , Rik van Riel , Andrew Morton List-ID: Hi Kame > > + if (pressure) { > > + nr_wakeup = max_t(int, atomic_read(&nr_watcher_task)>>4, 100); > > + atomic_long_set(&last_mem_notify, jiffies); > > + wake_up_locked_nr(&mem_wait, nr_wakeup); > > + } > What is this for ? and Why ? > Are there too many waiters ? my intent is for avoid thundering herd. 100 is heuristic value. and too many wakeup cause too much memory freed. I don't want it. of course, if any problem happened, I will change. Do you dislike it? -- 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