[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20061103174206.53f2c49e.akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 17:42:06 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To: Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
Cc: clameter@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Avoid allocating during interleave from almost full nodes
On Fri, 3 Nov 2006 17:26:05 -0800
Paul Jackson <pj@....com> wrote:
> Andrew wrote:
> > But in this application which you are proposing, any correlation with
> > elapsed walltime is very slight. It's just the wrong baseline to use.
> > What is the *sense* in it?
>
> Ah - but time is cheap as dirt, and scales like the common cold virus.
> That makes it sinfully attractive for secondary affect placement cache
> hints like this.
>
> What else would you suggest?
>
> Same question applies, I suppose, to my zonelist caching patch that is
> sitting in your *-mm patch stack, where you also had doubts about using
> wall clock time to decay the fullnode hints.
Depends what it's doing. "number of pages allocated" would be a good
"clock" to use in the VM. Or pages scanned. Or per-cpu-pages reloads.
Something which adjusts to what's going on.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists