![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 16:53:01 -0700 Daniel Phillips <phillips@google.com> wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote:> > Daniel Phillips <phillips@google.com> wrote: > >>What happened to the case where we just fill memory full of dirty file > >>pages backed by a remote disk? > > > > Processes which are dirtying those pages throttle at > > /proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio% of memory dirty. So it is not possible to "fill" > > memory with dirty pages. If the amount of physical memory which is dirty > > exceeds 40%: bug.> > Hi Andrew,> > So we make 400 MB of a 1 GB system by default - it's runtime configurable. > unavailable for write caching just to> get around the network receive starvation issue? No, it's mainly to avoid latency: to prevent tasks which want to allocate pages from getting stuck behind writeback. > What happens if some in kernel user grabs 68% of kernel memory to do some > very important thing, does this starvation avoidance scheme still work? Well something has to give way. The process might get swapped out a bit, or it might stall in the page allocator because of all the dirty memory. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-08-18 08:15 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||