On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 7:39 AM, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 07:33:13AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: >> Sorry for bothering you but I think you get the data. >> It helps someone in future very much to know why we determined to >> remove the feature at that time and they should do what kinds of >> experiment to prove it has a benefit to add compaction in kswapd >> again. > > This is a benchmark I'm unsure if it's ok to publish results but it > should be possible to simulate it with a device driver. > > Arthur provided kswapd load usage data too, so I hope that's enough. > > My other patch (compaction-kswapd-3) is way better than current logic > and retains compaction in kswapd. That shows slightly higher > kswapd utilization with Arthur's multimedia workload, and a bit worse > performance on the network benchmark. So I thought it was better to go > with the fastest potion as long as we don't have a logic that uses > compaction and shows improved performance and lower latency than with > no compaction at all in kswapd. > I didn't notice Arthur's problem. The patch seems to fix a real problem so I think it's enough. I wished you wrote down the link url about Arthur on LKML. You can remove compact_mode of compact_control. Otherwise, looks good to me. Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx> Thanks, -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- 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 internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>