[lkml]   [2000]   [Feb]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Linux Status For 2.3.x: v 2.3.43
    On Thu, 17 Feb 2000, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:

    > Hi,
    > On Thu, 17 Feb 2000 02:36:03 -0500 (EST), Alexander Viro
    > <> said:
    > > On Fri, 11 Feb 2000, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
    > >> There are basically three things we need to deal with.
    > >>
    > >> * Freeing memory.
    > >>
    > >> The simple one. An application wants more memory, so we need to throw
    > >> something out of cache.
    > > Probable point where we call it being shrink_mmap(). Other candidates?
    > shrink_mmap() is the obvious place. The biggest problem is that we will
    > need to export enough functionality to allow other filesystems to
    > hook their own data structures onto the page cache LRU list, so that
    > filesystem-specific caches can be reclaimed in the same shrink_mmap()
    > loop.

    You are going to run into some actual scheduling conflicts. A relatively
    low CPU/memory program can generate I/O which can flood an I/O channel. To
    avoid the flood, that program will have to be suspended... and that might
    result in a high idle time. The schedular must know not to run that
    program and that the idle time is for the "best". That I/O flood will be a
    problem only if there are contending programs which also need to do I/O on
    that channel.

    That suggests to me a more inclusive scheduler which handles resource
    contention beyond just CPU and memory.

    john alvord

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [W:0.020 / U:61.040 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site