Re: [PATCH 0/3] Removal of lumpy reclaim V2

[Rik van Riel]

On 04/11/2012 01:52 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 01:17:02PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:

> > Next step: get rid of __GFP_NO_KSWAPD for THP, first
> > in the -mm kernel
>
> Initially the flag was introduced because kswapd reclaimed too
> aggressively. One would like to believe that it would be less of a problem
> now but we must avoid a situation where the CPU and reclaim cost of kswapd
> exceeds the benefit of allocating a THP.

Since kswapd and the direct reclaim code now use
the same conditionals for calling compaction,
the cost ought to be identical.

I agree this is something we should shake out
in -mm for a while though, before considering a
mainline merge.

Andrew, would you be willing to take a removal
of __GFP_NO_KSWAPD in -mm, and push it to Linus
for the 3.6 kernel if no ill effects are seen
in -mm and -next?
--
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/