From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932182AbWDBIvw (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Apr 2006 04:51:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932183AbWDBIvw (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Apr 2006 04:51:52 -0400 Received: from mail06.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.187]:9636 "EHLO mail06.syd.optusnet.com.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932149AbWDBIvv (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Apr 2006 04:51:51 -0400 From: Con Kolivas To: Nick Piggin Subject: Re: 2.6.16-ck3 Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 18:51:39 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: ck list , linux list , Andrew Morton References: <200604021401.13331.kernel@kolivas.org> <442F5721.2040906@yahoo.com.au> In-Reply-To: <442F5721.2040906@yahoo.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200604021851.39763.kernel@kolivas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sunday 02 April 2006 14:46, Nick Piggin wrote: > The swap prefetching here, and the one in -mm AFAIKS still do not follow > the lowmem reserve ratio correctly. This might explain why prefetching > appears to help some people after updatedb swaps stuff out to make room > for pagecache -- it may actually be dipping into lower zones when it > shouldn't. Curious. I was under the impression lowmem reserve only did anything if you manually set it, and the users reporting on swap prefetch behaviour are not the sort of users likely to do so. I'm happy to fix whatever the lowmem reserve bug is but I doubt this bug is making swap prefetch behave better for ordinary users. Well, whatever the case is I'll have another look at lowmem reserve of course. Cheers, Con