On Fri, 3 Aug 2001, Mike Black wrote:
> Couldn't kswapd just gracefully back-off when it doesn't make any
> progress? In my case (with ext3/raid5 and a tiobench test) kswapd
> NEVER actually swaps anything out. It just chews CPU time.
> So...if kswapd just said "didn't make any progress...*2 last sleep" so
> it would degrade itself.
It wouldn't just degrade itself.
It would also prevent other programs in the system
from allocating memory, effectively halting anybody
wanting to allocate memory.
Rik
-- Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
Send all your spam to aardvark@nl.linux.org (spam digging piggy)
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 07 2001 - 21:00:30 EST