Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262910AbUCKASI (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Mar 2004 19:18:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262912AbUCKASI (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Mar 2004 19:18:08 -0500 Received: from mtaw4.prodigy.net ([64.164.98.52]:25023 "EHLO mtaw4.prodigy.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262910AbUCKART (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Mar 2004 19:17:19 -0500 Message-ID: <404FAFFE.9010403@matchmail.com> Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 16:17:02 -0800 From: Mike Fedyk User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040304) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nick Piggin CC: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: VM patches in 2.6.4-rc1-mm2 References: <20040302201536.52c4e467.akpm@osdl.org> <40469E50.6090401@matchmail.com> <20040303193025.68a16dc4.akpm@osdl.org> <404ECFE5.7040005@matchmail.com> <404ED388.5050905@cyberone.com.au> <404F651B.1030202@matchmail.com> <404FAA04.1020300@cyberone.com.au> In-Reply-To: <404FAA04.1020300@cyberone.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2184 Lines: 73 Nick Piggin wrote: > > > Mike Fedyk wrote: > >> Nick Piggin wrote: >>> Mainline doesn't put enough pressure on slab with highmem systems. This >>> creates a lot more ZONE_NORMAL pressure and that causes swapping. >>> >> >> Yep, saw that. Especially with 128MB Highmem (eg, 1G RAM) >> >>> Now with the 2.6 VM, you don't do any mapped memory scaning at all >> >> >> >> You mean 2.6-mm? >> > > Yes, either mm or linus. > Have there been any VM patches merged into mainline? Or are you saying that the imbalance in mainline would be enough to overcome to lack of scanning of mapped pages? >>> while you only have a small amount of memory pressure. This means that >>> truely inactive mapped pages never get reclaimed. >>> >> >> If I have enough pressure, they will be eventually? But my caches >> will still be smaller than optimal, right? >> > > If you get a lot of pressure at one time it should push out your > inactive mapped pages. Will get most of the really inactive ones, > but it won't help pages becoming inactive in future. > Ok, I see. This might be happening, since it is steadily getting more into swap. >>> The patches you are using do not address this. My split active list >>> patches should do so. Alternatively you can increase >>> /proc/sys/vm/swappiness, but that isn't a complete solution, and might >>> make things too swappy. It is a difficult beast to control. >> >> >> >> Has akpm said that he would be including the active split patch in -mm? >> > > Hasn't looked at it much. Probably not until some of the more basic > VM patches can get merged into -linus. Yes, I wonder if the VM patches helped -mm in the reaim tests... Let's get the fsfaz (free slab for all zones) into mainline asap! :-D >> Do you have a patch against -mm (you wrote to ask for your latest...)? >> > > Yep... Let me get back to you sometime next week. So far, the VM is reacting ok with this combined workload. Mike - 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/