Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754357Ab0HSTDu (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Aug 2010 15:03:50 -0400 Received: from smtp102.prem.mail.ac4.yahoo.com ([76.13.13.41]:39665 "HELO smtp102.prem.mail.ac4.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752736Ab0HSTDr (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Aug 2010 15:03:47 -0400 X-Yahoo-SMTP: _Dag8S.swBC1p4FJKLCXbs8NQzyse1SYSgnAbY0- X-YMail-OSG: lOFIvAoVM1kFub0Q8CiEjxqACnm1Xx7IpC5HgHKvsERI4DJ gesz4yLFgntaWveEWf7FrBLXIY7D0pkIsLHaMay5OD5x5zC2bz84SoqvReFP KS9rzmBbMPWVJw0Rjxo297ZZdZMIShFZtLehyMjDYZViGRoBYMjNE2JETfcO 5mF1Y2ZmX2U9LCLWNO9HgQ6TDyN0qAhCiDukNE0uO_5Bomip._UCt95ZKjbV K X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 14:03:42 -0500 (CDT) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: cl@router.home To: Chris Webb cc: Lee Schermerhorn , Wu Fengguang , Minchan Kim , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , KOSAKI Motohiro , Pekka Enberg , Andi Kleen Subject: Re: Over-eager swapping In-Reply-To: <20100819102055.GK2370@arachsys.com> Message-ID: References: <20100804032400.GA14141@localhost> <20100804095811.GC2326@arachsys.com> <20100804114933.GA13527@localhost> <20100804120430.GB23551@arachsys.com> <20100818143801.GA9086@localhost> <20100818144655.GX2370@arachsys.com> <20100818152103.GA11268@localhost> <1282147034.77481.33.camel@useless.localdomain> <20100818155825.GA2370@arachsys.com> <20100819102055.GK2370@arachsys.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1500 Lines: 29 On Thu, 19 Aug 2010, Chris Webb wrote: > I tried this on a handful of the problem hosts before re-adding their swap. > One of them now runs without dipping into swap. The other three I tried had > the same behaviour of sitting at zero swap usage for a while, before > suddenly spiralling up with %wait going through the roof. I had to swapoff > on them to bring them back into a sane state. So it looks like it helps a > bit, but doesn't cure the problem. > > I could definitely believe an explanation that we're swapping in preference > to allocating remote zone pages somehow, given the imbalance in free memory > between the nodes which we saw. However, I read the documentation for > vm.zone_reclaim_mode, which suggests to me that when it was set to zero, > pages from remote zones should be allocated automatically in preference to > swap given that zone_reclaim_mode & 4 == 0? If zone reclaim is off then pages from other nodes will be allocated if a node is filled up with page cache. zone reclaim typically only evicts clean page cache pages in order to keep the additional overhead down. Enabling swapping allows a more aggressive form of recovering memory in preference of going off line. The VM should work fine even without zone reclaim. -- 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/