Re: [RFC] Support volatile range for anon vma

2012-11-01 Thread Minchan Kim
Hi Christoph, On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 08:26:09PM +, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Fri, 26 Oct 2012, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > I guess it would improve system performance very well. > > But as I wrote down in description, downside of the patch is that we have to > > age anon lru although we don

Re: [RFC] Support volatile range for anon vma

2012-11-01 Thread Christoph Lameter
On Fri, 26 Oct 2012, Minchan Kim wrote: > I guess it would improve system performance very well. > But as I wrote down in description, downside of the patch is that we have to > age anon lru although we don't have swap. But gain via the patch is bigger > than > loss via aging of anon lru when mem

Re: [RFC] Support volatile range for anon vma

2012-10-25 Thread Minchan Kim
Hi Christoph, On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 03:19:27PM +, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Thu, 25 Oct 2012, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > #endif > > + /* > > +* True if page in this vma is reclaimed. > > What does that mean? All pages in the vma have been cleared out? It means at least, more than

Re: [RFC] Support volatile range for anon vma

2012-10-25 Thread Christoph Lameter
On Thu, 25 Oct 2012, Minchan Kim wrote: > #endif > + /* > + * True if page in this vma is reclaimed. What does that mean? All pages in the vma have been cleared out? > + TTU_IGNORE_VOLATILE = (1 << 11),/* ignore volatile */ > }; > #define TTU_ACTION(x) ((x) & TTU_ACTION_MASK) > >