From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 16:43:10 +0900 (JST) From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] vmscan: bail out of page reclaim after swap_cluster_max pages In-Reply-To: <20081114091828.48fc4b67.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <491D8CEC.5050106@redhat.com> <20081114091828.48fc4b67.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-Id: <20081116163915.F208.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: Andrew Morton Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Rik van Riel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: > > Of course, one thing we could do is exempt kswapd from this check. > > During light reclaim, kswapd does most of the eviction so scanning > > should remain balanced. Having one process fall down to a lower > > priority level is also not a big problem. > > > > As long as the direct reclaim processes do not also fall into the > > same trap, the situation should be manageable. > > > > Does that sound reasonable to you? > > I'll need to find some time to go dig through the changelogs. as far as I tried, git database doesn't have that changelogs. FWIW, I guess it is more old. -- 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