Hi Rik, Hugh and everyone, On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 11:35:09AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > On 03/29/2011 12:36 AM, James Bottomley wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Since LSF is less than a week away, the programme committee put together > > a just in time preliminary agenda for LSF. As you can see there is > > still plenty of empty space, which you can make suggestions > > There have been a few patches upstream by people for who > page allocation latency is a concern. > > It may be worthwhile to have a short discussion on what > we can do to keep page allocation (and direct reclaim?) > latencies down to a minimum, reducing the slowdown that > direct reclaim introduces on some workloads. I don't see the patches you refer to, but checking schedule we've a slot with Mel&Minchan about "Reclaim, compaction and LRU ordering". Compaction only applies to high order allocations and it changes nothing to PAGE_SIZE allocations, but it surely has lower latency than the older lumpy reclaim logic so overall it should be a net improvement compared to what we had before. Should the latency issues be discussed in that track? The MM schedule has still a free slot 14-14:30 on Monday, I wonder if there's interest on a "NUMA automatic migration and scheduling awareness" topic or if it's still too vapourware for a real topic and we should keep it for offtrack discussions, and maybe we should reserve it for something more tangible with patches already floating around. Comments welcome. Thanks, Andrea -- 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>