On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 10:52:18 +0530 Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > * Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2010-12-01 10:16:34]: > > > * KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2010-12-01 10:23:29]: > > > > > On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 15:45:55 +0530 > > > Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > Refactor zone_reclaim, move reusable functionality outside > > > > of zone_reclaim. Make zone_reclaim_unmapped_pages modular > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Why is this min_mapped_pages based on zone (IOW, per-zone) ? > > > > > > > Kamezawa-San, this has been the design before the refactoring (it is > > based on zone_reclaim_mode and reclaim based on top of that). I am > > reusing bits of existing technology. The advantage of it being > > per-zone is that it integrates well with kswapd. > > > Sorry, what I wanted to here was: Why min_mapped_pages per zone ? Why you don't add "limit_for_unmapped_page_cache_size" for the whole system ? I guess what you really want is "limit_for_unmapped_page_cache_size". Then, you have to use this kind of mysterious code. == (zone_unmapped_file_pages(zone) > + UNMAPPED_PAGE_RATIO * zone->min_unmapped_pages)) Thanks, -Kame -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>