Re: Why active list and inactive list?

From: Nick Piggin
Date: Mon Jan 22 2007 - 23:19:54 EST


Balbir Singh wrote:

This makes me wonder if it makes sense to split up the LRU into page
cache LRU and mapped pages LRU. I see two benefits

1. Currently based on swappiness, we might walk an entire list
searching for page cache pages or mapped pages. With these
lists separated, it should get easier and faster to implement
this scheme
2. There is another parallel thread on implementing page cache
limits. If the lists split out, we need not scan the entire
list to find page cache pages to evict them.

Of course I might be missing something (some piece of history)

I actually had patches to do "split active lists" a while back.

They worked by lazily moving the page at reclaim-time, based on
whether or not it is mapped. This isn't too much worse than the
kernel's current idea of what a mapped page is.

They actually got a noticable speedup of the swapping kbuild
workload, but at this stage there were some more basic
improvements needed, so the difference could be smaller today.

The other nice thing about it was that it didn't have a hard
cutoff that the current reclaim_mapped toggle does -- you could
opt to scan the mapped list at a lower ratio than the unmapped
one. Of course, it also has some downsides too, and would
require retuning...

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com -
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/