On 04/08/2013 09:48 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
Hello Simon,
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 03:26:12PM +0800, Simon Jeons wrote:
Ping Minchan.
On 04/02/2013 09:40 PM, Simon Jeons wrote:
Hi Hugh,
On 03/28/2013 05:41 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Minchan Kim wrote:
Swap subsystem does lazy
Hello Simon,
On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 03:26:12PM +0800, Simon Jeons wrote:
> Ping Minchan.
> On 04/02/2013 09:40 PM, Simon Jeons wrote:
> >Hi Hugh,
> >On 03/28/2013 05:41 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> >>On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Minchan Kim wrote:
> >>
> >>>Swap subsystem does lazy swap slot free with expec
Ping Minchan.
On 04/02/2013 09:40 PM, Simon Jeons wrote:
Hi Hugh,
On 03/28/2013 05:41 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Minchan Kim wrote:
Swap subsystem does lazy swap slot free with expecting the page
would be swapped out again so we can't avoid unnecessary write.
Hi Hugh,
On 03/28/2013 05:41 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Minchan Kim wrote:
Swap subsystem does lazy swap slot free with expecting the page
would be swapped out again so we can't avoid unnecessary write.
so we can avoid unnecessary write.
If pag
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 10:13:58PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Apr 2013, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 01:01:14PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > > On Fri, 29 Mar 2013, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 11:19:12AM -0700, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > > > >
On Tue, 2 Apr 2013, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 01:01:14PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Mar 2013, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 11:19:12AM -0700, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I wonder if something like this would have a similar result for
27, 2013 at 03:24:00PM -0700, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > > > > > From: Hugh Dickins [mailto:hu...@google.com]
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: remove swapcache page early
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe the answer is for fronts
ugh Dickins [mailto:hu...@google.com]
> > > > > Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: remove swapcache page early
> > > > >
> > > > > I believe the answer is for frontswap/zmem to invalidate the frontswap
> > > > > copy of the page (to free up the compressed memory w
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 11:19:12AM -0700, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > From: Minchan Kim [mailto:minc...@kernel.org]
> > Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: remove swapcache page early
> >
> > Hi Dan,
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 03:24:00PM -0700, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
&
> From: Minchan Kim [mailto:minc...@kernel.org]
> Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: remove swapcache page early
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 03:24:00PM -0700, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > > From: Hugh Dickins [mailto:hu...@google.com]
> > > Subject: Re: [
> From: Hugh Dickins [mailto:hu...@google.com]
> Subject: RE: [RFC] mm: remove swapcache page early
>
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > > From: Hugh Dickins [mailto:hu...@google.com]
> > > Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: remove swapcache page early
>
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 10:18:24AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 04:16:48PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > > > From: Hugh Dickins [mailto:hu...@google.com]
> > > > Subject: Re: [RFC
Hi Seth,
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 12:19:11PM -0500, Seth Jennings wrote:
> On 03/26/2013 09:22 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > Swap subsystem does lazy swap slot free with expecting the page
> > would be swapped out again so we can't avoid unnecessary write.
> >
> > But the problem in in-memory swap is
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 04:16:48PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > > From: Hugh Dickins [mailto:hu...@google.com]
> > > Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: remove swapcache page early
> > >
> > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Minchan K
Hi Dan,
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 03:24:00PM -0700, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > From: Hugh Dickins [mailto:hu...@google.com]
> > Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: remove swapcache page early
> >
> > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Minchan Kim wrote:
> >
> > > Swap subsystem does
Hi Hugh,
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 02:41:07PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Minchan Kim wrote:
>
> > Swap subsystem does lazy swap slot free with expecting the page
> > would be swapped out again so we can't avoid unnecessary write.
> so we can avoid
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > From: Hugh Dickins [mailto:hu...@google.com]
> > Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: remove swapcache page early
> >
> > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Minchan Kim wrote:
> >
> > > Swap subsystem does lazy swap slot free with expect
> From: Hugh Dickins [mailto:hu...@google.com]
> Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: remove swapcache page early
>
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Minchan Kim wrote:
>
> > Swap subsystem does lazy swap slot free with expecting the page
> > would be swapped out again so we ca
On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Swap subsystem does lazy swap slot free with expecting the page
> would be swapped out again so we can't avoid unnecessary write.
so we can avoid unnecessary write.
>
> But the problem in in-memory swap is that it consumes mem
> From: Minchan Kim [mailto:minc...@kernel.org]
> Subject: [RFC] mm: remove swapcache page early
>
> Swap subsystem does lazy swap slot free with expecting the page
> would be swapped out again so we can't avoid unnecessary write.
>
> But the problem in in-memory swap
On 03/26/2013 09:22 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Swap subsystem does lazy swap slot free with expecting the page
> would be swapped out again so we can't avoid unnecessary write.
>
> But the problem in in-memory swap is that it consumes memory space
> until vm_swap_full(ie, used half of all of swap de
Hi Kame,
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 02:15:41PM +0900, Kamezawa Hiroyuki wrote:
> (2013/03/27 11:22), Minchan Kim wrote:
> > Swap subsystem does lazy swap slot free with expecting the page
> > would be swapped out again so we can't avoid unnecessary write.
> >
> > But the problem in in-memory swap is
(2013/03/27 11:22), Minchan Kim wrote:
> Swap subsystem does lazy swap slot free with expecting the page
> would be swapped out again so we can't avoid unnecessary write.
>
> But the problem in in-memory swap is that it consumes memory space
> until vm_swap_full(ie, used half of all of swap device
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Swap subsystem does lazy swap slot free with expecting the page
> would be swapped out again so we can't avoid unnecessary write.
>
> But the problem in in-memory swap is that it consumes memory space
> until vm_swap_full(ie, used half of
Swap subsystem does lazy swap slot free with expecting the page
would be swapped out again so we can't avoid unnecessary write.
But the problem in in-memory swap is that it consumes memory space
until vm_swap_full(ie, used half of all of swap device) condition
meet. It could be bad if we use multi
25 matches
Mail list logo
