[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090623141147.8f2cef18.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:11:47 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: akataria@...are.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.
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:05:47 +0900 (JST)
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure this unevictable definition is good idea or not. currently
> hugepage isn't only non-account memory, but also various kernel memory doesn't
> account.
>
> one of drawback is that zone_page_state(UNEVICTABLE) lost to mean #-of-unevictable-pages.
> e.g. following patch is wrong?
>
> fs/proc/meminfo.c meminfo_proc_show()
> ----------------------------
> - K(pages[LRU_UNEVICTABLE]),
> + K(pages[LRU_UNEVICTABLE]) + hstate->nr_huge_pages,
>
>
> Plus, I didn't find any practical benefit in this patch. do you have it?
> or You only want to natural definition?
>
> I don't have any strong oppose reason, but I also don't have any strong
> agree reason.
>
I think "don't include Hugepage" is sane. Hugepage is something _special_, now.
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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