On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:04:40AM -0800, Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > David Mosberger wrote on Monday, March 14, 2005 10:49 AM > > >>>>> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 11:27:33 -0600, Robin Holt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>>>> said: > > > > Robin> Tony and David, Is there any chance I can do another push of > > Robin> the page table cache stuff with the last bits of cleanup and > > Robin> those getting in without addressing the removal of the > > Robin> cpu_idle() call? Neither solution I was given last week > > Robin> seems particularly well fitted to the problem at hand. I > > Robin> would like to get this in so I can continue working on the > > Robin> 4-level page table directory I am really trying to address. > > > > From memory, the last version I saw looked pretty decent to me. > > > > I agree with Ken's concerns, but given that we have historically done > > page-table cache shrinking from cpu_idle(), your patch doesn't worsen > > the situation (unless I'm missing something), so I think that concern > > could be addressed separately. > > > I plan to look at set_shrinker API. But please don't make that as a gating > factor for Robin's patch since I'm not sure when I will be able to get to it > or whether set_shrinker can actually solve the problem (it appears that it > has all the necessary infrastructure).
The problem really lies with the shrinker() callback being called from shrink_slab. We are not really a slab. What would be ideal is adding the callback to shrink_caches() which preserves the zone information. >From that, we could target just the cpus on that node (one of the patches throws away pages not from the cpus node). Thanks, Robin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
