From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: Break 2.4 VM in five easy steps References: From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: 07 Jun 2001 01:59:44 -0600 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Mike Galbraith Cc: Derek Glidden , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Mike Galbraith writes: > On 7 Jun 2001, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > > Does this improve the swapoff speed or just allow other programs to > > run at the same time? If it is still slow under that kind of load it > > would be interesting to know what is taking up all time. > > > > If it is no longer slow a patch should be made and sent to Linus. > > No, it only cures the freeze. The other appears to be the slow code > pointed out by Andrew Morton being tickled by dead swap pages. O.k. I think I'm ready to nominate the dead swap pages for the big 2.4.x VM bug award. So we are burning cpu cycles in sys_swapoff instead of being IO bound? Just wanting to understand this the cheap way :) Eric -- 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/