On Mer, 2005-12-14 at 13:01 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:08:41AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > because reserved memory pool would have to be "sum of all network
> > interface bandwidths * ammount of time expected to survive without
> > network" which is way too much.
>
> Yes, a global pool isn't really useful. A per-subsystem pool would be
> more reasonable...
The whole extra critical level seems dubious in itself. In 2.0/2.2 days
there were a set of patches that just dropped incoming memory on sockets
when the memory was tight unless they were marked as critical (ie NFS
swap). It worked rather well. The rest of the changes beyond that seem
excessive.
-
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]
