(12/28/11 4:33 PM), Dave Chinner wrote:
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 01:44:05PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
To me, it seems kswapd does usual work...reclaim small memory until free
gets enough. And it seems 'dd' allocates its memory from ZONE_DMA32 because
of gfp_t fallbacks.
Memo.
1. why shrink_slab() should be called per zone, which is not zone aware.
Isn't it enough to call it per priority ?
It is intended that it should be zone aware, but the current
shrinkers only have global LRUs and hence cannot discriminate
between objects from different zones easily. And if only a single
node/zone is being scanned, then we still have to call shirnk_slab()
to try to free objects in that zone/node, despite it's current
global scope.
I have some prototype patches that make the major slab caches and
shrinkers zone/node aware - that is the eventual goal here - but
first all the major slab cache LRUs need to be converted to be node
aware first. Then we can pass a nodemask into shrink_slab() and down
to the shrinkers so that those that have per-node LRUs can scan only
the appropriate nodes for objects to free. This is someting that I'm
working on in my spare time, but I have very little of that at the
moment, unfortunately.
His machine only have one node. per node basis don't help him. We need
1) to make per zone LRU or 2) to implement more clever inter zone
balancing code. but it seems off topic. I'm not sure why you are starting
talk about per node shrinker.
--
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>