On 10/11/2011 05:04 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
In other words, I think it's a fine solution if you're running a single application with very bursty memory allocations so you need to reclaim more memory when low, but that solution is troublesome if it comes at the penalty of other applications and that's a direct consequence of it being a global tunable. I'd much rather identify memory allocations in the kernel that causing the pain here and mitigate it by (i) attempting to sanely rate limit those allocations,
Rate limiting just increases the problem from what it was before the patch was introduced, because the entire purpose is to reduce allocation latencies by tasks with low latency requirements.
(ii) preallocate at least a partial amount of those allocations ahead of time so avoid significant reclaim all at one,
Unless I'm mistaken, isn't this functionally equivalent to increasing the size of the free memory pool?
or (iii) annotate memory allocations with such potential so that the page allocator can add this reclaim bonus itself only in these conditions.
I am not sure what you are proposing here. How would this scheme work? -- All rights reversed -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. 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>