[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0811170802010.3468@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 08:22:13 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: evict streaming IO cache first
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>
> How about resetting zone->recent_scanned/rotated to be some value calculated from
> INACTIVE_ANON/INACTIVE_FILE at some time (when the system is enough idle) ?
.. or how about just considering the act of adding a new page to the LRU
to be a "scan" event? IOW, "scanning" is not necessarily just an act of
the VM looking for pages to free, but would be a more general "activity"
meter.
IOW, when we calculate the percentages of anon-vs-file in get_scan_ratio()
we take into account how much anon-page activity vs how much file cache
activity there has been.
So if we've seen a lot of filesystem activity ("streaming"), we would tend
to prefer to scan the page cache. If we've seen a lot of anon page
mapping, we'd tend to prefer to scan the anon side.
That would seem to be the right kind of thing to do: if we literally have
a load that only does streaming and pages never get moved to the active
LRU, it should basically keep the page cache close to constant size -
which is just another way of saying that we should only be scanning page
cache pages.
Hmm?
Linus
--
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