linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] page allocator: Direct reclaim should always obey watermarks

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-Id: <200910272200.07614.elendil@planet.nl>
Date:	Tue, 27 Oct 2009 22:00:04 +0100
From:	Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>
To:	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Cc:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	stable <stable@...nel.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	reinette chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
	Kalle Valo <kalle.valo@....fi>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>,
	Karol Lewandowski <karol.k.lewandowski@...il.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] page allocator: Direct reclaim should always obey watermarks

On Saturday 17 October 2009, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Saturday 17 October 2009, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > Frans, you reported that both patches in combination reduced the
> > number of failures. Was it in fact just the kswapd change that made
> > the difference?
>
> I will retest both patches (as I already mailed you privately
> yesterday), but not today. The improvement with the combination was
> real, but I'm not sure which patch is the reason. I think the second,
> but I need to verify.
>
> I've done another 30 boots or so today, mainly in the "akpm" merge, and
> I've found new patterns that will help me nail down the regression. But
> ATM I can't see straight anymore, so it will have to wait until
> tomorrow.

Again sorry for the delay, but I needed to retest these with various 
kernels as the results were inconclusive. AFAICT neither of the two 
patches makes a significant difference for my test case.

Not sure if my initial test was broken or that it was just a case where the 
timings worked out favorably.

Cheers,
FJP
--
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/