From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 17:06:33 -0800 (PST) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: Drop PageReclaim() In-Reply-To: <20070208163953.ab2bd694.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-ID: References: <20070208140338.971b3f53.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070208142431.eb81ae70.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070208143746.79c000f5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070208151341.7e27ca59.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070208163953.ab2bd694.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Hugh Dickins , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > I doubt it. One would need to troll five-year-old changelogs and mailing > list discussion, but iirc that rotation was a large win in certain > workloads, preventing scanning meltdowns and general memory stress. I'd expect trouble here because of the taking of a LRU lock per page. For large amounts of concurrent I/O this could be an issue. > > One additional issue that is raised by the writeback pages remaining on > > the LRU lists is that we can get into the same livelock situation as with > > mlocked pages if we keep on skipping over writeback pages. > > That's why we rotate the reclaimable pages back to the head-of-queue. I think the reclaim writeout is one minor contributor here. If there are large amounts of writeback pages from f.e. streaming general I/O then we may run still into bad situations because we need to scan over them. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org