Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 22:02:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 22:01:55 -0500 Received: from ns.ithnet.com ([217.64.64.10]:55044 "HELO heather.ithnet.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 1 Nov 2001 22:01:42 -0500 Message-Id: <200111020301.EAA30696@webserver.ithnet.com> Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 04:01:27 +0100 From: Stephan von Krawczynski Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: new OOM heuristic failure (was: Re: VM: qsbench) To: Ed Tomlinson In-Reply-To: <20011102023711.EC03D93E4D@oscar.casa.dyndns.org> 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 > Hi, > > shrink_caches can end up lying. shrink_dcache_memory and friends do not tell > shrink_caches how many pages they free so nr_pages can be bogus... Is it worth > fixing? The simpliest, harmlessly racey and not too pretty, code follows. It > would also not be hard to change the shrink_ calls to return the number of pages > shrunk, but this would hit more code... > > Comments? I believe the idea of having a more precise nr_pages value can make a difference. We are trying to estimate if swapping is needed, which is pretty expensive. If we can avoid it by more accurately knowing what is really going on (without _too_ much costs) we can only win. 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/