[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A414F55.2040808@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:55:33 -0400
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: akataria@...are.com
CC: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hugepages should be accounted as unevictable pages.
Alok Kataria wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 14:24 -0700, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> I can see something reasonable on both sides of this
>> particular debate. However, even with this patch the
>> "unevictable" statistic does not reclaim the total
>> number of pages that are unevictable pages from a
>> zone, so I am not sure how it helps you achieve your
>> goal.
>
> Yes but most of the other memory (page table and others) which is
> unevictable is actually static in nature. IOW, the amount of this other
> kind of kernel unevictable pages can be actually interpolated from the
> amount of physical memory on the system.
That would be a fair argument, if it were true.
Things like page tables and dentry/inode caches vary
according to the use case and are allocated as needed.
They are in no way "static in nature".
--
All rights reversed.
--
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