[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: 2.4.19pre1aa1
    On Tue, 5 Mar 2002, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:

    > On Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:03:19 -0800 (PST)
    > Samuel Ortiz <> wrote:
    > > On Mon, 4 Mar 2002, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
    > > > yes, also make sure to keep this patch from SGI applied, it's very
    > > > important to avoid memory balancing if there's still free memory in the
    > > > other zones:
    > > >
    > > >
    > > This patch is included (in a slightly different form) in the 2.4.17
    > > discontig patch (
    > > But martin may need another patch to apply. With the current
    > > implementation of __alloc_pages, we have 2 problems :
    > > 1) A node is not emptied before moving to the following node
    > > 2) If none of the zones on a node have more freepages than min(defined as
    > > min+= z->pages_low), we start looking on the following node, instead of
    > > trying harder on the same node.
    > Forgive my ignorance, but aren't these two problems completely identical in a
    > UP or even SMP setup? I mean what is the negative drawback in your proposed
    > solution, if there simply is no other node? If it is not harmful to the
    > "standard" setups it may as well be included in the mainline, or not?
    You're right. It is harmful to the standard UMA boxes. However, the
    current __alloc_pages does just what it is supposed to do on those boxes.
    That's why very few people have been bothered by this bug. I was just
    waiting for Andrea or Rik's feedback before trying to push it to Marcelo.
    Maybe they'll find some time to review the patch soon...


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

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.022 / U:3.740 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site