From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D52336B005A for ; Mon, 8 Jun 2009 08:15:00 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4A2D129D.3020309@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 09:31:09 -0400 From: Rik van Riel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Reintroduce zone_reclaim_interval for when zone_reclaim() scans and fails to avoid CPU spinning at 100% on NUMA References: <1244466090-10711-1-git-send-email-mel@csn.ul.ie> <1244466090-10711-2-git-send-email-mel@csn.ul.ie> In-Reply-To: <1244466090-10711-2-git-send-email-mel@csn.ul.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Mel Gorman Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro , Christoph Lameter , yanmin.zhang@intel.com, Wu Fengguang , linuxram@us.ibm.com, linux-mm , LKML List-ID: Mel Gorman wrote: > The scanning occurs because zone_reclaim() cannot tell > in advance the scan is pointless because the counters do not distinguish > between pagecache pages backed by disk and by RAM. Yes it can. Since 2.6.27, filesystem backed and swap/ram backed pages have been living on separate LRU lists. This allows you to fix the underlying problem, instead of having to add a retry interval. -- All rights reversed. -- 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