On November 4, 2001 09:08 pm, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 02:36:34PM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On Sun, 4 Nov 2001, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> > > -/* Swap 50% full? Release swapcache more aggressively.. */
> > > -#define vm_swap_full() (nr_swap_pages*2 < total_swap_pages)
> > > +/* Free swap less than inactive pages? Release swapcache more
> > > aggressively.. */ +#define vm_swap_full() (nr_swap_pages <
> > > nr_inactive_pages)
> > >
> > > Comments?
> >
> > Makes absolutely no sense for systems which have more
> > swap than RAM, eg. a 64MB system with 200MB of swap.
>
> How does the inactive list get bigger than physical ram?
>
> If swap is bigger than ram, there is *no* possibility of the inactive list
> being bigger than swap, and thus no aggressive swapping...
nr_swap_pages is the number of swap pages free. The idea is to start
aggressive swap only when we are at risk of running out of swap. This way
we get to take full advantage of throwing away clean pages that are backed
up by swap when under vm pressure.
Ed Tomlinson
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 07 2001 - 21:00:25 EST