[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:0.022 / U:11.680 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site