linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 5/8] Make writeout during reclaim cpuset aware

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20070116202056.075c4c03.pj@sgi.com>
Date:	Tue, 16 Jan 2007 20:20:56 -0800
From:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Cc:	clameter@....com, akpm@...l.org, menage@...gle.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, nickpiggin@...oo.com.au,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, dgc@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC 5/8] Make writeout during reclaim cpuset aware

Andi wrote:
> Is there a reason this can't be just done by node, ignoring the cpusets?

This suggestion doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

We're looking to see if a task has dirtied most of the
pages in the nodes it is allowed to use.  If it has, then
we want to start pushing pages to the disk harder, and
slowing down the tasks writes.

What would it mean to do this per-node?  And why would
that be better?

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@....com> 1.925.600.0401
-
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/