From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4535160E.2010908@yahoo.com.au> Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 03:42:38 +1000 From: Nick Piggin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC] Remove temp_priority References: <45351423.70804@google.com> In-Reply-To: <45351423.70804@google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Martin Bligh Cc: Andrew Morton , LKML , Linux Memory Management , Nick Piggin List-ID: Martin Bligh wrote: > This is not tested yet. What do you think? > > This patch removes temp_priority, as it is racy. We're setting > prev_priority from it, and yet temp_priority could have been > set back to DEF_PRIORITY by another reclaimer. I like it. I wonder if we should get kswapd to stick its priority into the zone at the point where zone_watermark_ok becomes true, rather than setting all zones to the lowest priority? That would require a bit more logic though I guess. For that matter (going off the topic a bit), I wonder if try_to_free_pages should have a watermark check there too? This might help reduce the latency issue you brought up where one process has reclaimed a lot of pages, but another isn't making any progress and has to go through the full priority range? Maybe that's statistically pretty unlikely? -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com -- 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