Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 15 Sep 2002 10:53:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 15 Sep 2002 10:53:57 -0400 Received: from 2-028.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br ([200.193.160.28]:32917 "EHLO 2-028.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 15 Sep 2002 10:53:56 -0400 Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 11:58:27 -0300 (BRT) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: riel@imladris.surriel.com To: Andrew Morton cc: Daniel Phillips , lkml , "linux-mm@kvack.org" Subject: Re: 2.5.34-mm2 In-Reply-To: <3D841C8A.682E6A5C@digeo.com> Message-ID: X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1031 Lines: 31 On Sat, 14 Sep 2002, Andrew Morton wrote: > Daniel Phillips wrote: > > but that sure looks like the low hanging fruit. > > It's low alright. AFAIK Linux has always had this problem of > seizing up when there's a lot of dirty data around. Somehow I doubt the "seizing up" problem is caused by too much scanning. In fact, I'm pretty convinced it is caused by having too much IO submitted at once (and stalling in __get_request_wait). The scanning is probably not relevant at all and it may be beneficial to just ignore the scanning for now and do our best to keep the pages in better LRU order. regards, Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ Spamtraps of the month: september@surriel.com trac@trac.org - 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/