Re: [RFC] Remove temp_priority

[Martin J. Bligh]

> Coming from another angle, I am thinking about doing away with direct
> reclaim completely. That means we don't need any GFP_IO or GFP_FS, and
> solves the problem of large numbers of processes stuck in reclaim and
> skewing aging and depleting the memory reserve.

Last time I proposed that, the objection was how to throttle the heavy
dirtiers so they don't fill up RAM with dirty pages?

Also, how do you do atomic allocations? Create a huge memory pool and
pray really hard?

> But that's tricky because we don't have enough kswapds to get maximum
> reclaim throughput on many configurations (only single core opterons
> and UP systems, really).

It's not a question of enough kswapds. It's that we can dirty pages
faster than they can possibly be written to disk.

dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/foo

M.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/