On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 03:31:19PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 20-01-15 09:16:28, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 02:25:19PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > Is this planned to be folded into the original patch or go on its own. I
> > > am OK with both ways,
On Tue 20-01-15 09:16:28, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 02:25:19PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > Is this planned to be folded into the original patch or go on its own. I
> > am OK with both ways, maybe having it separate would be better from
> > documentation POV.
>
> I
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 02:25:19PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sat 17-01-15 10:21:19, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > High limit reclaim can currently overscan in proportion to how many
> > charges are happening concurrently. Tone it down such that charges
> > don't target the entire high-boundary
On Sat 17-01-15 10:21:19, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> High limit reclaim can currently overscan in proportion to how many
> charges are happening concurrently. Tone it down such that charges
> don't target the entire high-boundary excess, but instead only the
> pages they charged themselves when
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 02:25:19PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Sat 17-01-15 10:21:19, Johannes Weiner wrote:
High limit reclaim can currently overscan in proportion to how many
charges are happening concurrently. Tone it down such that charges
don't target the entire high-boundary
On Sat 17-01-15 10:21:19, Johannes Weiner wrote:
High limit reclaim can currently overscan in proportion to how many
charges are happening concurrently. Tone it down such that charges
don't target the entire high-boundary excess, but instead only the
pages they charged themselves when excess
On Tue 20-01-15 09:16:28, Johannes Weiner wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 02:25:19PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
Is this planned to be folded into the original patch or go on its own. I
am OK with both ways, maybe having it separate would be better from
documentation POV.
I submitted
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 03:31:19PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Tue 20-01-15 09:16:28, Johannes Weiner wrote:
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 02:25:19PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
Is this planned to be folded into the original patch or go on its own. I
am OK with both ways, maybe having
High limit reclaim can currently overscan in proportion to how many
charges are happening concurrently. Tone it down such that charges
don't target the entire high-boundary excess, but instead only the
pages they charged themselves when excess is detected.
Reported-by: Michal Hocko
High limit reclaim can currently overscan in proportion to how many
charges are happening concurrently. Tone it down such that charges
don't target the entire high-boundary excess, but instead only the
pages they charged themselves when excess is detected.
Reported-by: Michal Hocko
10 matches
Mail list logo
