From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 13:11:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] inactive_clean In-Reply-To: <1150747501.28517.114.camel@lappy> Message-ID: References: <1150719606.28517.83.camel@lappy> <1150740624.28517.108.camel@lappy> <1150747501.28517.114.camel@lappy> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Rik van Riel , Linus Torvalds , Andi Kleen , Rohit Seth , Andrew Morton , mbligh@google.com, hugh@veritas.com, andrea@suse.de, arjan@infradead.org, apw@shadowen.org, mel@csn.ul.ie, marcelo@kvack.org, anton@samba.org, paulmck@us.ibm.com, Nick Piggin , linux-mm , Nikita Danilov List-ID: On Mon, 19 Jun 2006, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > Hmmm.. My counter patches add NR_ANON to count the number of anonymous > > pages. These are all potentially dirty. If you throttle on NR_DIRTY + > > NR_ANON then we may have the effect without this patch. > > Sure, but what do you do to reach you threshold if there are not enough > mapped pages around to clean? You reach the threshold and the writeout happens. So there are enough clean pages available. > At that point the only thing left is to make sure some anonymous pages > become clean, that is write them out to swap and have them sit around in > the swap cache. Thats fine. The threshold just insures that you can write out the anonymous pages. > The next question is: 'which pages do I write out?', and there page > reclaim comes in; however are you only going to write out anonymous > pages and violate page order for file backed pages? I would think that one would first write out dirty file backed pages. What page order are you talking about? -- 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