Re: [RFC 0/3] Recursive reclaim (on __PF_MEMALLOC)

> That is his second patch-set, and I do worry about the irq latency that
> that will introduce. It very much has the potential to ruin everything
> that cares about interactiveness or latency.

I proposed a way to avoid increasing interrupt latency
in a simple way.

-Andi
-
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/

References:
- [RFC 0/3] Recursive reclaim (on __PF_MEMALLOC)
  - From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC 0/3] Recursive reclaim (on __PF_MEMALLOC)
  - From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC 0/3] Recursive reclaim (on __PF_MEMALLOC)
  - From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC 0/3] Recursive reclaim (on __PF_MEMALLOC)
  - From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC 0/3] Recursive reclaim (on __PF_MEMALLOC)
  - From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: Regression in 2.6.23-rc2-mm2, mounting cpusets causes a hang
Next by Date: Re: kfree(0) - ok?
Previous by thread: Re: [RFC 0/3] Recursive reclaim (on __PF_MEMALLOC)
Next by thread: Re: [RFC 0/3] Recursive reclaim (on __PF_MEMALLOC)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[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]