From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756154AbYFJCa6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jun 2008 22:30:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753176AbYFJCas (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jun 2008 22:30:48 -0400 Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.251]:62256 "EHLO an-out-0708.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752709AbYFJCar (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jun 2008 22:30:47 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=IclZMVLVpJB4pTWhmZ3HLyCM5z06pC7KRqX3FALbIgyhHFrcPTiulQq0EEVy5y4nCN zzfHTspqFir5lJ2NKSepQpz4Nsruoktt5HSnGUcZdai5SvXw61kCgLJFnxT5vLOeddqy nA0MdjvZ1aNaH9lA/rxpSMiCMkdHx6sTEFU5A= Message-ID: <28c262360806091930g70c96f59t627b4590ec59f729@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:30:46 +0900 From: "MinChan Kim" To: "KOSAKI Motohiro" Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 04/25] free swap space on swap-in/activation Cc: "Rik van Riel" , "Andrew Morton" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lee.schermerhorn@hp.com, "Hugh Dickins" In-Reply-To: <2f11576a0806090638u445209e7m359c03a4776826be@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080606202838.390050172@redhat.com> <20080606202858.570020389@redhat.com> <20080606180430.38bf1d82.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <28c262360806081914v357f4093ra1e1e9e36f487eb7@mail.gmail.com> <2f11576a0806090638u445209e7m359c03a4776826be@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 10:38 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > Hi Kim-san, > >>> - Can completely optimise the thing away if !CONFIG_SWAP. >> >> I think we can optimize more and more in case of if !CONFIG_SWAP. >> If system are !CONFIG_SWAP, we can never swap out anonymous pages. >> >> Don't we manage anonymous pages with list ? >> >> Such system don't need to insert anonymous pages into lru list when fault occur. >> It is just needless overhead. >> >> Also, If we can't reclaim anonymous pages, don't we need anon rmap facility ? >> I don't know well which subsystems used rmap. >> >> If pageout only use anonymous rmap for pageout, >> we can remove anonymous rmapping code in case of !CONFIG_SWAP > > You are right. > but I think rmap isn't bottle neck in embedded system. > Why do you want remove that? I think unnecessary code execution may increase power consumption and cache footprint. But I am not sure pageout just only one user in rmap. If another subsystem (ex, xen, kvm) use rmap for managing memory, we cannot remove rmap. -- Kinds regards, MinChan Kim