Re: kswapd eating too much CPU on ac16/ac18
From: Rik van Riel <hidden>
Date: 2000-06-16 15:08:06
On Fri, 16 Jun 2000, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Alan Cox wrote:quoted
Im interested to know if ac9/ac10 is the slow->fast change pointac5 is definately the breaking point. ac5 doesn't survive make -j30.. starts swinging it's VM machette at everything in sight. Reversing the VM changes to ac4 restores throughput to test1 levels (11 minute build vs 21-26 minutes for everything forward). Exact tested reversals below. FWIW, page aging doesn't seem to be the problem. I disabled that in ac17 and saw zero difference. (What may or not be a hint is that the /* Let shrink_mmap handle this swapout. */ bit in vmscan.c does make a consistent difference. Reverting that bit alone takes a minimum of 4 minutes off build time)
Interesting. Not delaying the swapout IO completely broke performance under the tests I did here... Delayed swapout vs. non-delayed swapouts was the difference between 300 swapouts/s vs. 700 swapouts/s (under a load with 400 swapins/s). OTOH, I can imagine it being better if you have a very small LRU cache, something like less than 1/2 MB. regards, Rik -- The Internet is not a network of computers. It is a network of people. That is its real strength. Wanna talk about the kernel? irc.openprojects.net / #kernelnewbies http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/ -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/