On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 11:30:17AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> The fact is, *none* of those things are true. The VM doesn't guarantee
> anything, and is already very much about statistics in many places. You
Many? I can't recall anything besides PF_MEMALLOC and the decision
that the VM is oom. Those are the only two gray areas... the safety
margin is large enough that nobody notices the lack of black-and-white
solution.
So instead of working to provide guarantees for the above two gray
spots, we're making everything weaker, that's the wrong direction as
far as I can tell, especially if we're going to mess up big time the
commo code in a backwards way only for those few users of those few
I/O devices out there.
In general every time reliability has a low priority than performance
I've an hard time to enjoy it.
-
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]
