From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <418CAA44.3090007@yahoo.com.au> Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 21:41:08 +1100 From: Nick Piggin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: removing mm->rss and mm->anon_rss from kernel? References: <4189EC67.40601@yahoo.com.au> <418AD329.3000609@yahoo.com.au> <418AE0F0.5050908@yahoo.com.au> <418AE9BB.1000602@yahoo.com.au> <1099622957.29587.101.camel@gaston> <418C55A7.9030100@yahoo.com.au> <418CA535.1030703@yahoo.com.au> <20041106103103.GC2890@holomorphy.com> In-Reply-To: <20041106103103.GC2890@holomorphy.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: William Lee Irwin III Cc: Christoph Lameter , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Hugh Dickins , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-ia64@kernel.vger.org List-ID: William Lee Irwin III wrote: > Christoph Lameter wrote: > >>>My page scalability patches need to make rss atomic and now with the >>>addition of anon_rss I would also have to make that atomic. > > > On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 09:19:33PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > >>Oh, one other thing Christoph - don't forget mm->nr_ptes > > > Forget it. Veto. > > Normal-sized systems need to monitor their workloads without crippling > them. Do the per-cpu splitting of the counters etc. instead, or other > proper incremental algorithms. Catastrophic /proc/ overhead won't fly. > Out of interest, what sort of systems and workloads are we talking about here? Also, can you suggest how one would do the per-cpu splitting or other proper incremental algorithm? I am not aware of any way except per-cpu magazines which I presume also won't fly due to being inaccurate and hugely bloating the mm_struct on big machines. -- 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: aart@kvack.org