| To: | Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: patch to give kmalloc a chance (RFC) |
| From: | Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 27 Sep 2002 17:06:57 -0700 |
| Cc: | Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>, Ravi Wijayaratne <ravi_wija@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>, riel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <3D94E12C.F0D0FE60@xxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20020927215041.77738.qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1033163688.10533.79.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3D94E12C.F0D0FE60@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4i |
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 03:52:28PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > For a NOFS allocation, simply retrying is a crude-but-effective fix. > We have kicked kswapd and kswapd _does_ have __GFP_FS. I wondered about this... and sleeping briefly isn't a bad if it penalizes the memory hog processes (sure, this isn't guaranteed but one hopes it happens more often than not). > So things work out, as long as the filesystem doesn't hold locks > which would prevent kswapd from being able to reclaim some memory. What about swapping to a file on the fs? Might this not be such a lock? --cw |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: patch to give kmalloc a chance (RFC), Andrew Morton |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: patch to give kmalloc a chance (RFC), Andrew Morton |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: patch to give kmalloc a chance (RFC), Andrew Morton |
| Next by Thread: | Re: patch to give kmalloc a chance (RFC), Andrew Morton |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |