Re: [PATCH] per-zone kswapd process

[William Lee Irwin III]

On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 09:06:20PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> I still don't see why it's per zone and not per node.  It seems strange
>>> that a wee little laptop would be running two kswapds?
>>> kswapd can get a ton of work done in the development VM and one per
>>> node would, I expect, suffice?

On Friday 13 September 2002 06:59, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> Machines without observable NUMA effects can benefit from it if it's
>> per-zone.

On Mon, Sep 16, 2002 at 07:44:30AM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> How?

The notion was that some level of parallelism would be bestowed on the
single-node case by using separate worker threads on a per-zone basis,
as they won't have more than one node to spawn worker threads for at all.

This notion apparently got shot down somewhere, and I don't care to rise
to its defense. I've lost enough debates this release to know better than
to try.

Bill