From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from localhost (bcrl@localhost) by kvack.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id BAA08071 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 1997 01:02:28 -0500 Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 01:02:27 -0500 (EST) From: Benjamin LaHaise Subject: memory priorities Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Grr... I should 'fix' this ;-) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 00:51:42 -0500 From: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: BOUNCE linux-mm: Invalid 'Approved:' header >>From owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Thu Dec 18 00:51:40 1997 Received: from max.fys.ruu.nl (max.fys.ruu.nl [131.211.32.73]) by kvack.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA07896 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 1997 00:51:38 -0500 Received: from mirkwood.dummy.home (root@anx1p8.fys.ruu.nl [131.211.33.97]) by max.fys.ruu.nl (8.8.7/8.8.7/hjm) with ESMTP id GAA14312; Thu, 18 Dec 1997 06:45:51 +0100 (MET) Received: (from riel@localhost) by mirkwood.dummy.home (8.6.12/8.6.9) id AAA01388; Thu, 18 Dec 1997 00:12:55 +0100 Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 00:12:53 +0100 (MET) From: Rik van Riel X-Sender: riel@mirkwood.dummy.home Reply-To: H.H.vanRiel@fys.ruu.nl To: Pavel Machek cc: linux-mm Subject: memory priorities In-Reply-To: <19971217221100.40232@Elf.mj.gts.cz> Message-ID: Approved: ObHack@localhost Organization: none MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 17 Dec 1997, Pavel Machek wrote: [snip Pavel (?) implemented memory priorities] > > > But proved to be pretty ineffective. I came to this idea when I > > > realized that to cook machine, running 100 processes will not hurt too > > > much. But running 10 processes, 50 megabytes each will cook almost > > > anything... > > > > what about: > > > > if (page->age - p->mem_priority) > > exit 0 / goto next; > > else { > > get_rid_of(page); > > and_dont_show_your_face_again_for_some_time(page); > > } > > I tried only manipulating comparasion, and not putting in into > sleep. I did not find benchmark where it does any performance > gain. ;-) Seems like it does nearly nothing. Well, if you only swap out the page, it will be swapped in quite soon and the only effect is that your system will have more pagefaults... If there is some free field in the page-table (once the page gets swapped out) we could use it to indicate that the system should wait some time with swapping this one in again... Rik. +-----------------------------+------------------------------+ | For Linux mm-patches, go to | "I'm busy managing memory.." | | my homepage (via LinuxHQ). | H.H.vanRiel@fys.ruu.nl | | ...submissions welcome... | http://www.fys.ruu.nl/~riel/ | +-----------------------------+------------------------------+