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...
Which is an idea that I toyed with, as well. The problem that I ran into
is how to tag an allocation as belonging to a specific subsystem. For
example, in our code we need networking to use the critical pool. How do
we let __alloc_pages() know what allocations belong to networking?
Networking needs named slab allocations, kmalloc allocations, and whole
page allocations to function. Should each subsystem get it's own GFP flag
(GFP_NETWORKING, GFP_SCSI, GFP_SOUND, GFP_TERMINAL, ad nauseum)? Should we
create these pools dynamically and pass a reference to which pool each
specific allocation uses (thus adding a parameter to all memory allocation
functions in the kernel)? I realize that per-subsystem pools would be
better, but I thought about this for a while and couldn't come up with a
reasonable way to do it.
>>gigabytes into your machine. But don't go introducing infrastructure
>>that _can't_ be used right.
>
>
> Agreed, the current design of the patch can't be used right.
Well, it can for our use, but I recognize that isn't going to be a huge
selling point! :) As I mentioned in my reply to Pavel, I'd really like to
find a way to design something that WOULD be generally useful.
Thanks!
-Matt
-
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]
