| To: | Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: patch to give kmalloc a chance (RFC) |
| From: | Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 27 Sep 2002 17:10:53 -0700 |
| Cc: | Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>, Ravi Wijayaratne <ravi_wija@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>, riel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| References: | <20020927215041.77738.qmail@web40614.mail.yahoo.com> <1033163688.10533.79.camel@jen.americas.sgi.com> <3D94E12C.F0D0FE60@digeo.com> <20020928000657.GA20839@tapu.f00f.org> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Chris Wedgwood wrote: > > ... > > 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? > Probably. swapfiles are quite prone to oom deadlocks in 2.4. In 2.5, swapfiles are just as robust as raw swapdevices. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: patch to give kmalloc a chance (RFC), Chris Wedgwood |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: XFS allows expansions, but no contraction?, Andi Kleen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: patch to give kmalloc a chance (RFC), Chris Wedgwood |
| Next by Thread: | Suse 8.1 and XFS 1.1, Raymond |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |