On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 05:30:15PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > But lines 865-866 together with line 846 make most shrink_zone() invocations
> > only run one batch of scan. The numbers become:
>
> True. Need to go into a huddle with the changelogs, but I have a feeling
> that lines 865 and 866 aren't very important. What happens if we remove
> them?
Maybe the answer is: can we accept to free 15M memory at one time for a 64G zone?
(Or can we simply increase the DEF_PRIORITY?)
btw, maybe it's time to lower the low_mem_reserve.
There should be no need to keep ~50M free memory with the balancing patch.
Regards,
Wu
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
