Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 16 Dec 2000 09:43:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 16 Dec 2000 09:43:49 -0500 Received: from penguin.e-mind.com ([195.223.140.120]:12094 "EHLO penguin.e-mind.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 16 Dec 2000 09:43:31 -0500 Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 15:13:03 +0100 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Alan Cox Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 2.2.19pre1 Message-ID: <20001216151303.D25150@inspiron.random> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk on Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 07:51:04PM +0000 X-GnuPG-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.gnupg.asc X-PGP-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.asc Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 07:51:04PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > o Basic page aging (Neil Schemenauer) > | This is a beginning to trying to get the VM right (page aging isn't a matter of correctness of the VM, it's only a matter of performance basically only during swap [for all other usages lru behaviour is enough]) About the implementation the swapcache aging is going to be wrong and it could cause swapcache storms during swap. In 2.2.x we can't implement a kind of deactivate_page that works on lru, because there's no lru, so all we can do is to ignore the aging for swap_cache that isn't referenced by anybody (either on swap or on memory). Also the implementation is dubios and suboptimal (I'd replace PG_referenced with page->age instead of mixing the two things, plus page->age is set at page-freeing time while you want to initialize it only when adding swapcache or pagecache [this save CPU cycles]). Even if the patch [after fixing the swapout issue pointed out above] looks safe I need a bit more time to verify that it doesn't change the balancing of the VM (the point of aging is to make harder the in-core pages to be freed so it will somehow increase the swapout factor) and so in the very short term I won't support the VM-global patch on top of page-aging (to avoid invalidating all the testing and feedback it had). For 2.2.19pre2 short term I'd suggest to backout the aging patch and to apply VM-global against 2.2.18. This will make VM behaviour better regardless of aging, then if you still feel the need of aging on your 486 8mbyte box I will try to put your patch on top of VM-global at least after addressing the swapcache shrinking issue and optimizing it a little bit. Comments? Andrea - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/