[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080227140221.424C.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:04:15 +0900
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] page reclaim throttle take2
Hi
> > I don't think so.
> > all modern many cpu machine stand on NUMA.
> > it mean following,
> > - if cpu increases, then zone increases, too.
> >
> > if default value increase by #cpus, lock contension dramatically increase
> > on large numa.
> >
> > Have I overlooked anything?
> >
> How about adding something like..
> ==
> CONFIG_SIMULTANEOUS_PAGE_RECLAIMERS
> int
> default 3
> depends on DEBUG
> help
> This value determines the number of threads which can do page reclaim
> in a zone simultaneously. If this is too big, performance under heavy memory
> pressure will decrease.
> If unsure, use default.
> ==
>
> Then, you can get performance reports from people interested in this
> feature in test cycle.
hm, intersting.
but sysctl parameter is more better, i think.
OK, I'll add it at next post.
--
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