Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762810AbXEVU56 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 May 2007 16:57:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756353AbXEVU5t (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 May 2007 16:57:49 -0400 Received: from hermes1.dur.ac.uk ([129.234.8.20]:35041 "EHLO hermes1.dur.ac.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756017AbXEVU5s (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 May 2007 16:57:48 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 923 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 22 May 2007 16:57:48 EDT Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 21:42:22 +0100 From: Ash Milsted To: ck@vds.kolivas.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ck list Subject: Re: [ck] Re: [PATCH] mm: swap prefetch improvements Message-Id: <20070522214222.8b197247.thatistosayiseenem@gawab.com> In-Reply-To: <200705222037.54741.kernel@kolivas.org> References: <20070430162007.ad46e153.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <200705222020.58474.kernel@kolivas.org> <20070522102530.GB2344@elte.hu> <200705222037.54741.kernel@kolivas.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.2 (GTK+ 2.10.12; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-DurhamAcUk-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2574 Lines: 54 On Tue, 22 May 2007 20:37:54 +1000 Con Kolivas wrote: > On Tuesday 22 May 2007 20:25, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Con Kolivas wrote: > > > > > there was nothing else running on the system - so i suspect the > > > > > swapin activity flagged 'itself' as some 'other' activity and > > > > > stopped? The swapins happened in 4 bursts, separated by 5 seconds > > > > > total idleness. > > > > > > > > I've noted burst swapins separated by some seconds of pause in my > > > > desktop system too (with sp_tester and an idle gnome). > > > > > > That really is expected, as just about anything, including journal > > > writeout, would be enough to put it back to sleep for 5 more seconds. > > > > note that nothing like that happened on my system - in the > > swap-prefetch-off case there was _zero_ IO activity during the sleep > > period. > > Ok, granted it's _very_ conservative. I really don't want to risk its presence > being a burden on anything, and the iowait it induces probably makes it turn > itself off for another PREFETCH_DELAY (5s). I really don't want to cross the > line to where it is detrimental in any way. Not dropping out on a > cond_resched and perhaps making the delay tunable should be enough to make it > a little less "sleepy". > > -- > -ck Hi. I just did some video encoding on my desktop and I was noticing (for the first time in a while) that running apps had to hit swap quite a lot when I switched to them (the encoding was going at full blast for most of the day, and most of the time other running apps were idle). Now, a good half of my RAM appeared to be free during all this, so I was thinking at the time that it would be nice if swap prefetch could be tunably more aggressive. I guess it would be ideal in this case if it could kick in during tunably low disk-IO periods, even if the CPU is rather busy. I'm sure you've considered this, so I only butt in here to cast a vote for it. :) Of course, I could be completely wrong about the possibility.. and I seem to remember that the disk cache can take up about half the ram by default without this showing up in 'gnome-system-monitor'... which I guess might happen during heavy encoding.. but even if it did, I could have set the limit lower, and would then have still appreciated prefetching. Ash - 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/