Con Kolivas wrote:
On Saturday 08 April 2006 10:55, Nick Piggin wrote:
Con Kolivas wrote:
On Friday 07 April 2006 22:40, Nick Piggin wrote:
How would zone_watermark_ok always fail though?
Withdrew this patch a while back; ignore
Well, whether or not that particular patch isa good idea, it
is definitely a bug if zone_watermark_ok could ever always
fail due to lowmem reserve and we should fix it.
Ok. I think I presented enough information for why I thought zone_watermark_ok
would fail (for ZONE_DMA). With 16MB ZONE_DMA and a vmsplit of 3GB we have a
lowmem_reserve of 12MB. It's pretty hard to keep that much ZONE_DMA free, I
don't think I've ever seen that much free on my ZONE_DMA on an ordinary
desktop without any particular ZONE_DMA users. Changing the tunable can make
the lowmem_reserve larger than ZONE_DMA is on any vmsplit too as far as I
understand the ratio.
Umm, for ZONE_DMA allocations, ZONE_DMA isn't a lower zone. So that
12MB protection should never come into it (unless it is buggy?).
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
-
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]
