From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 18:19:31 +1100 (EST) From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: swapout selection change in pre1 In-Reply-To: <01011420222701.14309@oscar> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Ed Tomlinson Cc: Linus Torvalds , Marcelo Tosatti , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Sun, 14 Jan 2001, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > Think its gone too far in the other direction now. Running a > heavily threaded java program, 35 threads and RSS of 44M a 128M > KIII-400 with cpu usage of 4-10%, the rest of the system is > getting paged out very quickly and X feels slugish. While we > may not want to treat each thread as if it was a process, I > think we need more than one scan per group of threads sharing > memory. > > Ideas? Bullshit. The old MM selection code used mm->swap_cnt to give exactly the same result, only scanning through a larger list. The change that could affect this could be the thing where we immediately unmap a page from a process if it isn't used, so refill_inactive_scan() has better chances. I have something (ugly?) for this in my patch on http://www.surriel.com/patches/ ... I'll clean it up and send it. (damn, a week without internet is horrible ... lots of duplicated/different/... work, some of it wasted) regards, Rik -- Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose... http://www.surriel.com/ http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com.br/ -- 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.eu.org/Linux-MM/