From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 15:52:39 +0900 From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] page reclaim throttle take2 In-Reply-To: <47C4F9C0.5010607@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <47C4F9C0.5010607@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Message-Id: <20080227153614.425B.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: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, David Rientjes , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Rik van Riel , Lee Schermerhorn , Nick Piggin List-ID: Hi > Things are changing, with memory hot-add remove, CPU hotplug , the topology can > change and is no longer static. One can create fake NUMA nodes on the fly using > a boot option as well. agreed. > Since we're talking of parallel reclaims, I think it's a function of CPUs and > Nodes. I'd rather keep it as a sysctl with a good default value based on the > topology. If we end up getting it wrong, the system administrator has a choice. > That is better than expecting him/her to recompile the kernel and boot that. A > sysctl does not create problems either w.r.t changing the number of threads, no > hard to solve race-conditions - it is fairly straight forward sorry, I don't understand yet. I think my patch is already function of CPUs and Nodes. per zone limit indicate propotional #cpus and #nodes. please tell me the topology that per zone limit doesn't works so good. I think boot option and sysctl should be used only while -mm for get various feedback. end up, we should select more better default, and remove sysctl. - kosaki -- 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