Re: Linux 2.4.1-ac7

From: Rik van Riel (
Date: Tue Feb 13 2001 - 07:43:02 EST

On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > Could you please try the attached patch on top of latest Rik's patch?
> Sure thing.. (few minutes later) no change.

That's because your problem requires a change to the
balancing between swap_out() and refill_inactive_scan()
in refill_inactive()...

The big problem here is that no matter which magic
proportion between the two functions we use, it'll always
be wrong for a large proportion of the people out there.

This means we need to have a good way to auto-tune this
thing. I'm thinking of letting swap_out() start out way
less active than refill_inactive_scan() with extra calls
to swapout being made from refill_inactive_scan when we
think it's needed...

(... I'm writing a patch right now ...)



Virtual memory is like a game you can't win;
However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to More majordomo info at Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 15 2001 - 21:00:21 EST