[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2023 22:59:52 +0100
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@...el.com>,
Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] variable-order, large folios for anonymous memory
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 02:11:19PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2023 at 02:12:01PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 07, 2023 at 01:40:53PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >
> > > Is swapping working as expected? zswap?
> >
> > Suboptimally. Swap will split folios in order to swap them.
>
> Wouldn't that mean if high order folios are used a lot but swap is also
> used, until this is fixed you wouldn't get the expected reclaim gains
> for high order folios and we'd need compaction more then?
They're split in shrink_folio_list(), so they stay intact until
that point?
> > Somebody needs to fix that, but it should work.
>
> As we look at shmem stuff it was on the path so something we have
> considered doing. Ie, it's on our team's list of items to help with
> but currently on a backburner.
Something I was thinking about is that you'll need to prohibit swap
devices or swap files being created on large block devices. Until
we rewrite the entire swap subsystem ...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists