Alan Cox wrote:
> 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.
Actually, Sridhar's code (mentioned earlier in this thread) *does* drop
incoming packets that are not 'critical', but unfortunately you need to
completely copy the packet into kernel memory before you can do any
processing on it to determine whether or not it's 'critical', and thus
accept or reject it. If network traffic is coming in at a good clip and
the system is already under memory pressure, it's going to be difficult to
receive all these packets, which was the inspiration for this patchset.
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]
