Re: [RFC 5/8] Make writeout during reclaim cpuset aware

Andi wrote:
> Is there a reason this can't be just done by node, ignoring the cpusets?

This suggestion doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

We're looking to see if a task has dirtied most of the
pages in the nodes it is allowed to use.  If it has, then
we want to start pushing pages to the disk harder, and
slowing down the tasks writes.

What would it mean to do this per-node?  And why would
that be better?

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <[email protected]> 1.925.600.0401
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [RFC 5/8] Make writeout during reclaim cpuset aware
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [RFC 0/8] Cpuset aware writeback
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
  • [RFC 5/8] Make writeout during reclaim cpuset aware
    • From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC 5/8] Make writeout during reclaim cpuset aware
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [RFC 1/8] Convert higest_possible_node_id() into nr_node_ids
• Next by Date: Re: [RFC 5/8] Make writeout during reclaim cpuset aware
• Previous by thread: Re: [RFC 5/8] Make writeout during reclaim cpuset aware
• Next by thread: Re: [RFC 5/8] Make writeout during reclaim cpuset aware
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]