Re: [PATCH v4] zone_reclaim is always 0 by default

2009-06-09 Thread Andrew Morton
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009 07:02:14 -0500 Robin Holt wrote: > On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 11:37:55AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 04:55:07AM -0500, Robin Holt wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 12:50:48PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > > > > Let me start by saying I agree completel

Re: [PATCH v4] zone_reclaim is always 0 by default

2009-06-09 Thread Mel Gorman
On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 10:48:34PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > Hi > > sorry for late responce. my e-mail reading speed is very slow ;-) > > First, Could you please read past thread? > I think many topic of this mail are already discussed. > I think I caught them all but the horrible fact of

Re: [PATCH v4] zone_reclaim is always 0 by default

2009-06-09 Thread KOSAKI Motohiro
Hi sorry for late responce. my e-mail reading speed is very slow ;-) First, Could you please read past thread? I think many topic of this mail are already discussed. > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 07:23:15PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > > > Current linux policy is, zone_reclaim_mode is enabled

Re: [PATCH v4] zone_reclaim is always 0 by default

2009-06-09 Thread Robin Holt
On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 11:37:55AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 04:55:07AM -0500, Robin Holt wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 12:50:48PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > > Let me start by saying I agree completely with everything you wrote and > > still disagree with this pat

Re: [PATCH v4] zone_reclaim is always 0 by default

2009-06-09 Thread Mel Gorman
On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 04:55:07AM -0500, Robin Holt wrote: > On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 12:50:48PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > Let me start by saying I agree completely with everything you wrote and > still disagree with this patch, but was willing to compromise and work > around this for our upcom

Re: [PATCH v4] zone_reclaim is always 0 by default

2009-06-09 Thread Robin Holt
On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 12:50:48PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: Let me start by saying I agree completely with everything you wrote and still disagree with this patch, but was willing to compromise and work around this for our upcoming x86_64 machine by putting a "value add" into our packaging of addi

Re: [PATCH v4] zone_reclaim is always 0 by default

2009-06-08 Thread Mel Gorman
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 07:23:15PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > Current linux policy is, zone_reclaim_mode is enabled by default if the > machine > has large remote node distance. it's because we could assume that large > distance > mean large server until recently. > We don't make assump

Re: [PATCH v4] zone_reclaim is always 0 by default

2009-06-04 Thread Robin Holt
Acked-by: Robin Holt On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 07:23:15PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: ... > Actually, zone_reclaim_mode=1 mean "I dislike remote node allocation rather > than > disk access", it makes performance improvement to HPC workload. > but it makes performance degression to desktop, file

Re: [PATCH v4] zone_reclaim is always 0 by default

2009-06-04 Thread Wu Fengguang
On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 06:23:15PM +0800, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > Current linux policy is, zone_reclaim_mode is enabled by default if the > machine > has large remote node distance. it's because we could assume that large > distance > mean large server until recently. > > Unfortunately, rece

[PATCH v4] zone_reclaim is always 0 by default

2009-06-04 Thread KOSAKI Motohiro
Current linux policy is, zone_reclaim_mode is enabled by default if the machine has large remote node distance. it's because we could assume that large distance mean large server until recently. Unfortunately, recent modern x86 CPU (e.g. Core i7, Opeteron) have P2P transport memory controller. IO