Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760644AbXIQWKi (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:10:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759045AbXIQWKG (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:10:06 -0400 Received: from netops-testserver-4-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.29]:35788 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758800AbXIQWKC (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:10:02 -0400 Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:10:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: clameter@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com To: Bernd Schmidt cc: Nick Piggin , Mel Gorman , andrea@suse.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Mel Gorman , William Lee Irwin III , David Chinner , Jens Axboe , Badari Pulavarty , Maxim Levitsky , Fengguang Wu , swin wang , totty.lu@gmail.com, hugh@veritas.com, joern@lazybastard.org Subject: Re: [00/41] Large Blocksize Support V7 (adds memmap support) In-Reply-To: <46EE60C1.7030507@t-online.de> Message-ID: References: <20070911060349.993975297@sgi.com> <200709111606.10873.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <200709120407.48344.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <46EE60C1.7030507@t-online.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1020 Lines: 22 On Mon, 17 Sep 2007, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > Christoph Lameter wrote: > > True. That is why we want to limit the number of unmovable allocations and > > that is why ZONE_MOVABLE exists to limit those. However, unmovable > > allocations are already rare today. The overwhelming majority of allocations > > are movable and reclaimable. You can see that f.e. by looking at > > /proc/meminfo and see how high SUnreclaim: is (does not catch everything but > > its a good indicator). > > Just to inject another factor into the discussion, please remember that Linux > also runs on nommu systems, where things like user space allocations are > neither movable nor reclaimable. Hmmm.... However, sorting of the allocations would result in avoiding defragmentation to some degree? - 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/