On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 06:39:03PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 05:11:41PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > RSS was another option it felt as arbitrary as a plain delay. > > Right, it would avoid 'small' programs getting scanning done with the > rationale that their cost isn't that large since they don't have much > memory to begin with. > Yeah, but it's not necessarily true. Whatever value we pick there can be an openmp process that fits in there. > The same can be said for tasks that don't run much -- irrespective of > how much absolute runtime they've gathered. > > Is there any other group of tasks that we do not want to scan? > strcmp(p->comm, ....) > Maybe if we can list all the various exclusions we can get to a proper > quantifier that way. > > So far we've got: > > - doesn't run long > - doesn't run much > - doesn't have much memory > - does not have sysV shm sections > > Should I revert 5bca23035391928c4c7301835accca3551b96cc2 with an > > explanation that it potentially is completely useless in the purely > > multi-process shared case? > > Yeah I suppose so.. Will do. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- 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>