On 05/14/2013 01:52 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > kswapd0-632 1210443.469309: mm_shrink_slab_start: cache items 600456 delta 1363 total_scan 300228 > kswapd3-635 1210443.510311: mm_shrink_slab_start: cache items 514885 delta 1250 total_scan 101025 > kswapd1-633 1210443.517440: mm_shrink_slab_start: cache items 613824 delta 1357 total_scan 97727 > kswapd2-634 1210443.527026: mm_shrink_slab_start: cache items 568610 delta 1331 total_scan 259185 > kswapd3-635 1210443.573165: mm_shrink_slab_start: cache items 486408 delta 1277 total_scan 243204 > kswapd1-633 1210443.697012: mm_shrink_slab_start: cache items 550827 delta 1224 total_scan 82231 > > in the space of 230ms, I can see why the caches are getting > completely emptied. kswapds are making multiple, large scale scan > passes on the caches. Looks like our problem is an impedence > mismatch: global windup counter, per-node cache scan calculations. > > So, that's the mess we really need to cleaning up before going much > further with this patchset. We need stable behaviour from the > shrinkers - I'll look into this a bit deeper tomorrow. That doesn't totally make sense to me. Both our scan and count functions will be per-node now. This means we will always try to keep ourselves within reasonable maximums on a per-node basis as well. -- 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/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>