Re: [PATCH -mm 11/25] more aggressively use lumpy reclaim

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Andrew Morton
Date: Friday, June 6, 2008 - 6:05 pm

On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 16:28:49 -0400
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> wrote:


Can we upadte the changelog to explain why this actually happened?


a) the kernel was using 8k (2-page) stacks and

b) all the memory was stuck on the active list, so reclaim wasn't
   able to find any order-1 pages and wasn't able to find any order-0
   pages which gave it allocatable order-1 pages.

?


hm, I guess that this para kinda says that.  Not sure what the
"excessive pageout IO" part is referring to?


I guess that tweaking the inactive_ratio could be used to determine
this?


--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH -mm 11/25] more aggressively use lumpy reclaim, Rik van Riel, (Fri Jun 6, 1:28 pm)
Re: [PATCH -mm 11/25] more aggressively use lumpy reclaim, Andrew Morton, (Fri Jun 6, 6:05 pm)