Linux-kernel mailing list archive 2000-23,: Re: memory pressure callbacks (was: 2.5 TODO)

# Re: memory pressure callbacks (was: 2.5 TODO)

Hans Reiser (hans@reiser.to)
Tue, 06 Jun 2000 20:48:18 -0700

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Michael J. Dikkema: "2.2.15 fs corruption?"
- Previous message: Hans Reiser: "Re: journaling & VM (was: Re: reiserfs being part of the kernel:"

"Quintela Carreira Juan J." wrote:

>
> As I spoted in other mail, I preffer to call a registered function to
> free pages. It makes no sense to do that kind of notification. One
> of the reasons is that if shrink_mmap hits *two* (put here any number)
> consecutive pages of your cache, you would try to free pages every
> time. I think that pages in the LRU cache should be *freeable*
> without any other requeriment. If they are not freeable without more
> restrictions, why are we putting them in one LRU queue. We are not
> honouring the LRU queue anyway. Note also that with the recent
> changes in the VM cache, we begin with a bigger priority (64 instead
> of 6), that means that in first round we ask all the caches to return
> (nr_elements/64), that is quite small number and we will go to all the
> caches before shrink too much the first one. With the old code, the
> LRU cache was shrinked too fast and the rest of the caches was
> shrinked only when the memory pressure was *too* high.

Hmm, sounds like a good algorithm, I haven't read this most recent code, ignore
my previous complaint.

>

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

- Next message: Michael J. Dikkema: "2.2.15 fs corruption?"
- Previous message: Hans Reiser: "Re: journaling & VM (was: Re: reiserfs being part of the kernel:"