[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1456498316.25322.35.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:51:56 -0500
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Ebru Akagunduz <ebru.akagunduz@...il.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com,
aarcange@...hat.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, xiexiuqi@...wei.com,
gorcunov@...nvz.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mgorman@...e.de,
rientjes@...gle.com, vbabka@...e.cz,
aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
mhocko@...e.cz, boaz@...xistor.com, raindel@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v5 0/3] mm: make swapin readahead to gain more thp
performance
On Thu, 2016-02-25 at 22:17 -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Feb 2016, Ebru Akagunduz wrote:
> > in Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 05:35:50PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> > > Am I forgetting anything obvious?
> > >
> > > Is this too aggressive?
> > >
> > > Not aggressive enough?
> > >
> > > Could PGPGOUT + PGSWPOUT be a useful
> > > in-between between just PGSWPOUT or
> > > PGSTEAL_*?
>
> I've no idea offhand, would have to study what each of those
> actually means: I'm really not familiar with them myself.
There are a few levels of page reclaim activity:
PGSTEAL_* - any page was reclaimed, this could just
be file pages for streaming file IO,etc
PGPGOUT - the VM wrote pages back to disk to reclaim
them, this could include file pages
PGSWPOUT - the VM wrote something to swap to reclaim
memory
I am not sure which level of aggressiveness khugepaged
should check against, but my gut instinct would probably
be the second or third.
--
All Rights Reversed.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists