From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263097AbUB0Uyj (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:54:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263108AbUB0Uyj (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:54:39 -0500 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:2497 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263097AbUB0Uyh (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Feb 2004 15:54:37 -0500 Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:55:16 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Rik van Riel Cc: andrea@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.4.23aa2 (bugfixes and important VM improvements for the high end) Message-Id: <20040227125516.44a85ba4.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20040227122936.4c1be1fd.akpm@osdl.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Rik van Riel wrote: > > > Current 2.6 will write out nr_inactive>>DEF_PRIORITY pages, > > That may be a bit much on extremely huge systems, but that should > require no more than a little tweaking to fix. Certainly no code > changes should be needed ... hmm, with 4 million pages on the inactive list that's 1000 pages. It might be OK. Bear in mind that under usual circumstances the direct-reclaim path will refuse to block on request queue exhaustion so we might end up just scanning past some dirty pages without starting I/O against them at all. End result: some jumbling up of the LRU order. I suspect that's a second-order problem though. But hey, if we have a testcase, we can fix it!