On Thu 19-09-19 15:46:11, Lin Feng wrote:
>
>
> On 9/19/19 11:49, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 10:33:10AM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
> > > On 9/18/19 20:33, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > I absolutely agree here. From you changelog it is also not clear what is
> > > > the
On 9/19/19 11:49, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 10:33:10AM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
On 9/18/19 20:33, Michal Hocko wrote:
I absolutely agree here. From you changelog it is also not clear what is
the underlying problem. Both congestion_wait and wait_iff_congested
should wake up
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 10:33:10AM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
> On 9/18/19 20:33, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > I absolutely agree here. From you changelog it is also not clear what is
> > the underlying problem. Both congestion_wait and wait_iff_congested
> > should wake up early if the congestion is
On 9/18/19 20:33, Michal Hocko wrote:
+mm_reclaim_congestion_wait_jiffies
+==
+
+This control is used to define how long kernel will wait/sleep while
+system memory is under pressure and memroy reclaim is relatively active.
+Lower values will decrease the kernel wait/sleep time.
+
Hi,
On 9/18/19 19:38, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 11:21:04AM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
Adding a new tunable is not the right solution. The right way is
to make Linux auto-tune itself to avoid the problem. For example,
bdi_writeback contains an estimated write bandwidth
On Tue 17-09-19 05:06:46, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 07:58:24PM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
[...]
> > +mm_reclaim_congestion_wait_jiffies
> > +==
> > +
> > +This control is used to define how long kernel will wait/sleep while
> > +system memory is under pressure and memroy
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 11:21:04AM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
> > Adding a new tunable is not the right solution. The right way is
> > to make Linux auto-tune itself to avoid the problem. For example,
> > bdi_writeback contains an estimated write bandwidth (calculated by the
> > memory management
On 9/17/19 20:06, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 07:58:24PM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
In direct and background(kswapd) pages reclaim paths both may fall into
calling msleep(100) or congestion_wait(HZ/10) or wait_iff_congested(HZ/10)
while under IO pressure, and the sleep length
This sysctl is named as mm_reclaim_congestion_wait_jiffies, default to
HZ/10 as unchanged to old codes.
It is in jiffies unit and can be set in range between [1, 100], so
refers to CONFIG_HZ before tuning.
In direct and background(kswapd) pages reclaim paths both may fall into
calling
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 07:58:24PM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
> In direct and background(kswapd) pages reclaim paths both may fall into
> calling msleep(100) or congestion_wait(HZ/10) or wait_iff_congested(HZ/10)
> while under IO pressure, and the sleep length is hard-coded and the later
> two will
10 matches
Mail list logo
