On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 4:26 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 22 Apr 2011 00:59:26 -0700
> > From this, I feel I need to use unbound workqueue. BTW, with patches forI used most of weekend for background reclaim on workqueue and I changed many
> > current thread pool model, I think starvation problem by dirty pages
> > cannot be seen.
> > Anyway, I'll give a try.
> >
>
> Then do you suggest me to wait for your patch for my next post?
>
things based on your patch (but dropped most of kswapd descriptor...patches.)
Thank you for the heads up. Although I am still having concerns on the workqueue approach, but
thank you for your time to give a try.
One of my concerns is still the debug-ability and I am not being convinced the resource consumption is a killing issue for the per-memcg
kswapd thread. Anyway, looking to see your change.
--Ying
I'll post it today after some tests on machines in my office. It worked well
on my laptop.
Thanks,
-Kame