[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150313190915.GA12589@akamai.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 15:09:15 -0400
From: Eric B Munson <emunson@...mai.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5] Allow compaction of unevictable pages
On Fri, 13 Mar 2015, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 03/13/2015 01:26 PM, Eric B Munson wrote:
>
> > --- a/mm/compaction.c
> > +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> > @@ -1046,6 +1046,8 @@ typedef enum {
> > ISOLATE_SUCCESS, /* Pages isolated, migrate */
> > } isolate_migrate_t;
> >
> > +int sysctl_compact_unevictable;
> > +
> > /*
> > * Isolate all pages that can be migrated from the first suitable block,
> > * starting at the block pointed to by the migrate scanner pfn within
>
> I suspect that the use cases where users absolutely do not want
> unevictable pages migrated are special cases, and it may make
> sense to enable sysctl_compact_unevictable by default.
Given that sysctl_compact_unevictable=0 is the way the kernel behaves
now and the push back against always enabling compaction on unevictable
pages, I left the default to be the behavior as it is today. I agree
that this is likely the minority case, but I'd really like Peter Z or
someone else from real time to say that they are okay with the default
changing.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists