On Thu, 4 Dec 2008 10:28:39 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <email@example.com> wrote:
Yes, this is a very surprising result. Suspicious, in fact.
If this improved the throughput of direct-reclaim callers then one
would expect it to make larger improvements for kswapd (assuming
that all other things are equal for those tasks, which they are not).
What is your direct-reclaim to kswapd-reclaim ratio for that workload?
(grep pgscan /proc/vmstat)
Does that patch make any change to the amount of CPU time which kswapd
Or you can not bother doing this work ;) The patch looks sensible
anyway. It's just that the numbers look whacky.