Re: [PATCH 2/2] page allocator: Direct reclaim should always obey watermarks

[Frans Pop]

On Saturday 17 October 2009, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Saturday 17 October 2009, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > Frans, you reported that both patches in combination reduced the
> > number of failures. Was it in fact just the kswapd change that made
> > the difference?
>
> I will retest both patches (as I already mailed you privately
> yesterday), but not today. The improvement with the combination was
> real, but I'm not sure which patch is the reason. I think the second,
> but I need to verify.
>
> I've done another 30 boots or so today, mainly in the "akpm" merge, and
> I've found new patterns that will help me nail down the regression. But
> ATM I can't see straight anymore, so it will have to wait until
> tomorrow.

Again sorry for the delay, but I needed to retest these with various 
kernels as the results were inconclusive. AFAICT neither of the two 
patches makes a significant difference for my test case.

Not sure if my initial test was broken or that it was just a case where the 
timings worked out favorably.

Cheers,
FJP
--
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/