Hi sorry for the delay. > Will you be picking it up or should I? The changelog should be more or less > the same as yours and consider it > > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mel@xxxxxxxxx> > > It'd be nice if the original tester is still knocking around and willing > to confirm the patch resolves his/her problem. I am running this patch on > my desktop at the moment and it does feel a little smoother but it might be > my imagination. I had trouble with odd stalls that I never pinned down and > was attributing to the machine being commonly heavily loaded but I haven't > noticed them today. > > It also needs an Acked-by or Reviewed-by from Kosaki Motohiro as it alters > logic he introduced in commit [78dc583: vmscan: low order lumpy reclaim also > should use PAGEOUT_IO_SYNC] My reviewing doesn't found any bug. however I think original thread have too many guess and we need to know reproduce way and confirm it. At least, we need three confirms. o original issue is still there? o DEF_PRIORITY/3 is best value? o Current approach have better performance than Wu's original proposal? (below) Anyway, please feel free to use my reviewed-by tag. Thanks. --- linux-next.orig/mm/vmscan.c 2010-06-24 14:32:03.000000000 +0800 +++ linux-next/mm/vmscan.c 2010-07-22 16:12:34.000000000 +0800 @@ -1650,7 +1650,7 @@ static void set_lumpy_reclaim_mode(int p */ if (sc->order > PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER) sc->lumpy_reclaim_mode = 1; - else if (sc->order && priority < DEF_PRIORITY - 2) + else if (sc->order && priority < DEF_PRIORITY / 2) sc->lumpy_reclaim_mode = 1; else sc->lumpy_reclaim_mode = 0; -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>