Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 21:55:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 21:55:25 -0500 Received: from ns.ithnet.com ([217.64.64.10]:41732 "HELO heather.ithnet.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 21:55:14 -0500 Message-Id: <200111020255.DAA30651@webserver.ithnet.com> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 03:55:05 +0100 From: Stephan von Krawczynski Cc: Lorenzo Allegrucci , , Andrea Arcangeli Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: new OOM heuristic failure (was: Re: VM: qsbench) To: Stephan von Krawczynski In-Reply-To: <200111020230.DAA30535@webserver.ithnet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: IMHO/0.97.1 (Webmail for Roxen) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Ok. I re-checked the code and found out this approach cannot stand. > the list scan _is_ already exited early when priority is low: Sorry for followup on my own mail, but there is another thing that comes to my mind: swap_out is currently in no way priority-dependant. But it could be (the parameter is there). How about swapping more pages in tighter memory situation? The basic idea is that if there is a rising need for mem it cannot be wrong to do a bit more than under normal circumstances. One could achieve this simply by: int counter, nr_pages = SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX; to int counter, nr_pages = SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX * DEF_PRIORITY / priority; in swap_out. The idea behind is to reduce the overhead in finding out if swapping is needed by simply swapping more everytime we already gone "the long way to knowing". Regards, Stephan - 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/