Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261869AbTKYA6q (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Nov 2003 19:58:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261873AbTKYA6q (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Nov 2003 19:58:46 -0500 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:39554 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261869AbTKYA6p (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Nov 2003 19:58:45 -0500 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:05:06 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: "Martin J. Bligh" Cc: colpatch@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Make balance_dirty_pages zone aware (1/2) Message-Id: <20031124170506.4024bb30.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <39670000.1069719009@flay> References: <3FBEB27D.5010007@us.ibm.com> <20031123143627.1754a3f0.akpm@osdl.org> <1034580000.1069688202@[10.10.2.4]> <20031124100043.5416ed4c.akpm@osdl.org> <39670000.1069719009@flay> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1639 Lines: 36 "Martin J. Bligh" wrote: > > > What trouble? > > Well ... not so sure of this as I once was ... so be gentle with me ;-) > But if the system has been running for a while, memory is full of pagecache, > etc. We try to allocate from the local node, fail, and fall back to the > other nodes, which are all full as well. Then we wake up kswapd, but all > pages in this node are dirty, so we block for ages on writeout, making > mem allocate really latent and slow (which was presumably what > balance_dirty_pages was there to solve in the first place). It is possible. You'd be pretty unlucky to dirty so much lowmem when there is such a huge amount of highmem floating about, but yes, if you tried hard enough... I have a feeling that some observed problem must have prompted this coding frenzy from Matthew. Surely some problem was observed, and this patch fixed it up?? > > If we make the dirty threshold a proportion of the initial amount of free > > memory in ZONE_NORMAL, as is done in 2.4 it will not be possible to fill > > any node with dirty pages. > > True. But that seems a bit extreme for a system with 64GB of RAM, and only > 896Mb in ZONE_NORMAL ;-) Doesn't really seem like the right way to fix it. > Increasing /proc/sys/vm/lower_zone_protection can be used to teach the VM to not use lowmem for pagecache. Does this solve the elusive problem too? - 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/