[lkml]   [2002]   [May]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Bug with shared memory.
At some point in the past, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>> How much are you swapping in your workload? (as said the fast paths are
>> hurted a little so it's expected that it's almost as fast as mainline
>> with a kernel compile, similar to the fact we also add anon pages to the
>> lru list). I think you're only exercising the fast paths in your
>> workload, not the memory balancing that is the whole point of the change.

On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 10:23:05AM -0700, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> No swapping. We fixed the horrendous locking problem we were seeing,
> but this was only one test - obviously others are needed. But I think we're
> in agreement that it's time to give it a beating and see what happens ;-)

There's no mystery or secrecy to the locking work, really just overzealous
(which is good wrt. locking changes) QA and a conservative release schedule.

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 13:26    [W:0.050 / U:7.056 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site