On 19 Feb 2019, at 20:38, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
On 02/19/2019 06:26 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 01:12:07PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
But the location of this temp page matters as well because you would
like to
saturate the inter node interface. It needs to be
On 21 Feb 2019, at 13:10, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 02:08:26PM -0800, Zi Yan wrote:
>> From: Zi Yan
>>
>> In stead of using two migrate_pages(), a single exchange_pages() would
>> be sufficient and without allocating new pages.
>
> So i believe it would be better to arrange
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 02:08:26PM -0800, Zi Yan wrote:
> From: Zi Yan
>
> In stead of using two migrate_pages(), a single exchange_pages() would
> be sufficient and without allocating new pages.
So i believe it would be better to arrange the code differently instead
of having one function that
On 02/19/2019 06:26 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 01:12:07PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>> But the location of this temp page matters as well because you would like to
>> saturate the inter node interface. It needs to be either of the nodes where
>> the source or
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 01:12:07PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> But the location of this temp page matters as well because you would like to
> saturate the inter node interface. It needs to be either of the nodes where
> the source or destination page belongs. Any other node would generate
On 02/18/2019 11:29 PM, Zi Yan wrote:
> On 18 Feb 2019, at 9:52, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 09:51:33AM -0800, Zi Yan wrote:
>>> On 18 Feb 2019, at 9:42, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
On 2/18/19 6:31 PM, Zi Yan wrote:
> The purpose of proposing exchange_pages() is to
On 18 Feb 2019, at 9:52, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 09:51:33AM -0800, Zi Yan wrote:
>> On 18 Feb 2019, at 9:42, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>>> On 2/18/19 6:31 PM, Zi Yan wrote:
The purpose of proposing exchange_pages() is to avoid allocating any
new
page,
so
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 09:51:33AM -0800, Zi Yan wrote:
> On 18 Feb 2019, at 9:42, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > On 2/18/19 6:31 PM, Zi Yan wrote:
> > > The purpose of proposing exchange_pages() is to avoid allocating any
> > > new
> > > page,
> > > so that we would not trigger any potential page
On 18 Feb 2019, at 9:42, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
On 2/18/19 6:31 PM, Zi Yan wrote:
The purpose of proposing exchange_pages() is to avoid allocating any
new
page,
so that we would not trigger any potential page reclaim or memory
compaction.
Allocating a temporary page defeats the purpose.
On 2/18/19 6:31 PM, Zi Yan wrote:
> The purpose of proposing exchange_pages() is to avoid allocating any new
> page,
> so that we would not trigger any potential page reclaim or memory
> compaction.
> Allocating a temporary page defeats the purpose.
Compaction can only happen for order > 0
On 17 Feb 2019, at 3:29, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 02:08:26PM -0800, Zi Yan wrote:
+struct page_flags {
+ unsigned int page_error :1;
+ unsigned int page_referenced:1;
+ unsigned int page_uptodate:1;
+ unsigned int page_active:1;
+ unsigned int
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 02:08:26PM -0800, Zi Yan wrote:
> +struct page_flags {
> + unsigned int page_error :1;
> + unsigned int page_referenced:1;
> + unsigned int page_uptodate:1;
> + unsigned int page_active:1;
> + unsigned int page_unevictable:1;
> + unsigned int
From: Zi Yan
In stead of using two migrate_pages(), a single exchange_pages() would
be sufficient and without allocating new pages.
Signed-off-by: Zi Yan
---
include/linux/ksm.h | 5 +
mm/Makefile | 1 +
mm/exchange.c | 846
In stead of using two migrate_pages(), a single exchange_pages() would
be sufficient and without allocating new pages.
Signed-off-by: Zi Yan
---
include/linux/ksm.h | 5 +
mm/Makefile | 1 +
mm/exchange.c | 846
mm/internal.h
14 matches
Mail list logo
