On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 03:09:14PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 22:51:21 +0100 Mel Gorman wrote:
>
> > > That's a large change in system time. Does this all include kswapd
> > > activity?
> > >
> >
> > I don't have a profile to quantify that exactly. It takes 7 hours to
>
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 03:09:14PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 22:51:21 +0100 Mel Gorman mgor...@suse.de wrote:
That's a large change in system time. Does this all include kswapd
activity?
I don't have a profile to quantify that exactly. It takes 7 hours to
On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 22:51:21 +0100 Mel Gorman wrote:
> > That's a large change in system time. Does this all include kswapd
> > activity?
> >
>
> I don't have a profile to quantify that exactly. It takes 7 hours to
> complete a test on that machine in this configuration
That's nuts. Why
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 02:14:04PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 17:48:03 +0100 Mel Gorman wrote:
>
> > The fair zone allocation policy round-robins allocations between zones
> > within a node to avoid age inversion problems during reclaim. If the
> > first allocation fails,
On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 17:48:03 +0100 Mel Gorman wrote:
> The fair zone allocation policy round-robins allocations between zones
> within a node to avoid age inversion problems during reclaim. If the
> first allocation fails, the batch counts is reset and a second attempt
> made before entering the
The fair zone allocation policy round-robins allocations between zones
within a node to avoid age inversion problems during reclaim. If the
first allocation fails, the batch counts is reset and a second attempt
made before entering the slow path.
One assumption made with this scheme is that
The fair zone allocation policy round-robins allocations between zones
within a node to avoid age inversion problems during reclaim. If the
first allocation fails, the batch counts is reset and a second attempt
made before entering the slow path.
One assumption made with this scheme is that
On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 17:48:03 +0100 Mel Gorman mgor...@suse.de wrote:
The fair zone allocation policy round-robins allocations between zones
within a node to avoid age inversion problems during reclaim. If the
first allocation fails, the batch counts is reset and a second attempt
made before
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 02:14:04PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 17:48:03 +0100 Mel Gorman mgor...@suse.de wrote:
The fair zone allocation policy round-robins allocations between zones
within a node to avoid age inversion problems during reclaim. If the
first allocation
On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 22:51:21 +0100 Mel Gorman mgor...@suse.de wrote:
That's a large change in system time. Does this all include kswapd
activity?
I don't have a profile to quantify that exactly. It takes 7 hours to
complete a test on that machine in this configuration
That's nuts.
10 matches
Mail list logo