On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 11:58:41AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 07:10:17PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Wed 06-04-11 12:08:05, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 11:37:15AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > Well, I wouldn't bother too much with kswapd handling. MM people plan to > > get rid of writeback from direct reclaim and just remove the dirty page > > from LRU and recycle it once flusher thread writes it... > > kswapd is not in the direct reclaim path - it's the background > memory reclaim path. Writeback from direct reclaim is a problem > because of stack usage, and that problem doesn't exist for kswapd. FYI the IO initiated from pageout() in kswapd/direct reclaim can mostly be transfered to the flushers. Here is the early RFC patch, and I'll submit an update soon. http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg09199.html Thanks, Fengguang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
