[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:0.061 / U:2.484 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site