Re: [PATCH 0/3] Fix malloc() stall in zone_reclaim() and bringbehaviour more in line with expectations V3

[Christoph Lameter]

On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Mel Gorman wrote:

> > May I ask your worry?
> >
>
> Simply that I believe the intention of PF_SWAPWRITE here was to allow
> zone_reclaim() to aggressively reclaim memory if the reclaim_mode allowed
> it as it was a statement that off-node accesses are really not desired.

Right.

> Ok. I am not fully convinced but I'll not block it either if believe it's
> necessary. My current understanding is that this patch only makes a difference
> if the server is IO congested in which case the system is struggling anyway
> and an off-node access is going to be relatively small penalty overall.
> Conceivably, having PF_SWAPWRITE set makes things worse in that situation
> and the patch makes some sense.

We could drop support for RECLAIM_SWAP if that simplifies things.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/