[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070110225720.7a46e702.akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 22:57:20 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To: Aubrey <aubreylee@...il.com>
Cc: "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...l.org>,
"Hua Zhong" <hzhong@...il.com>, "Hugh Dickins" <hugh@...itas.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org,
kenneth.w.chen@...el.com, mjt@....msk.ru
Subject: Re: O_DIRECT question
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 14:45:12 +0800
Aubrey <aubreylee@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > In the interim you could do the old "echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches"
> > thing, but that's terribly crude - drop_caches is really only for debugging
> > and benchmarking.
> >
> Yes. This method can drop caches, but will fragment memory.
That's what page reclaim will do as well.
What you want is Mel's antifragmentation work, or lumpy reclaim.
> This is
> not what I want. I want cache is limited to a tunable value of the
> whole memory. For example, if total memory is 128M, is there a way to
> trigger reclaim when cache size > 16M?
If there was, it'd "fragment memory" as well.
You might get a little benefit from increasing /proc/sys/vm/min_free_kbytes,
but not much. Some page allocation tweaks would aid that.
But basically, to do this well, serious work is needed.
-
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