On Tue, 22 May 2007 20:37:54 +1000
Con Kolivas <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 May 2007 20:25, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Con Kolivas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > there was nothing else running on the system - so i suspect the
> > > > > swapin activity flagged 'itself' as some 'other' activity and
> > > > > stopped? The swapins happened in 4 bursts, separated by 5 seconds
> > > > > total idleness.
> > > >
> > > > I've noted burst swapins separated by some seconds of pause in my
> > > > desktop system too (with sp_tester and an idle gnome).
> > >
> > > That really is expected, as just about anything, including journal
> > > writeout, would be enough to put it back to sleep for 5 more seconds.
> >
> > note that nothing like that happened on my system - in the
> > swap-prefetch-off case there was _zero_ IO activity during the sleep
> > period.
>
> Ok, granted it's _very_ conservative. I really don't want to risk its presence
> being a burden on anything, and the iowait it induces probably makes it turn
> itself off for another PREFETCH_DELAY (5s). I really don't want to cross the
> line to where it is detrimental in any way. Not dropping out on a
> cond_resched and perhaps making the delay tunable should be enough to make it
> a little less "sleepy".
>
> --
> -ck
Hi. I just did some video encoding on my desktop and I was noticing
(for the first time in a while) that running apps had to hit swap quite
a lot when I switched to them (the encoding was going at full blast for
most of the day, and most of the time other running apps were
idle). Now, a good half of my RAM appeared to be free during all this,
so I was thinking at the time that it would be nice if swap prefetch
could be tunably more aggressive. I guess it would be ideal in this
case if it could kick in during tunably low disk-IO periods, even if
the CPU is rather busy. I'm sure you've considered this, so I only butt
in here to cast a vote for it. :)
Of course, I could be completely wrong about the possibility.. and I
seem to remember that the disk cache can take up about half the ram by
default without this showing up in 'gnome-system-monitor'... which I
guess might happen during heavy encoding.. but even if it did, I could
have set the limit lower, and would then have still appreciated
prefetching.
Ash
-
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/
[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]
