On Wed, 2 May 2001, Roger Larsson wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 May 2001 02:43, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On Tue, 1 May 2001, David S. Miller wrote:
> > > Rik van Riel writes:
> > > > Then we will be scanning through memory looking for something to
> > > > swap out (otherwise we'd not be in need of swap space, right?).
> > > > At this point we can simply free up swap entries while scanning
> We could reclaim swap space for dirty pages. They have to be
> rewritten anyway...
>
> Or would the fragmentation risk be too high?
I guess the fragmentation would get worse. Also, when you've got
more than enough swap left there's absolutely no reason to reclaim
the swap when pages get dirtied.
I just guess we should start reclaiming swap space as soon as the
free swap space gets below, say, 5%. We could go for a more complex
system of only reclaiming the swap space of dirty pages from a lower
threshold on, but I doubt that's worth the complexity.
regards,
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 : Mon May 07 2001 - 21:00:11 EST