lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jan]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [KORG] Re: kernel.org lies about latest -mm kernel
    On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 11:18:37AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
    > Randy Dunlap wrote:
    > >
    > >>>BTW, yesterday my 2.4 patches were not published, but I noticed that
    > >>>they were not even signed not bziped on hera. At first I simply thought
    > >>>it was related, but right now I have a doubt. Maybe the automatic script
    > >>>has been temporarily been disabled on hera too ?
    > >>The script that deals with the uploads also deals with the packaging -
    > >>so yes the problem is related.
    > >
    > >and with the finger_banner and version info on www.kernel.org page?
    >
    > Yes, they're all connected.
    >
    > The load on *both* machines were up above the 300s yesterday, probably
    > due to the release of a new Knoppix DVD.

    I have one trivial idea : would it help to use 2 addresses to server data,
    one for pure kernel usage (eg: git, rsync) and one with other stuff such
    as DVDs, but with a low limit on the number of concurrent connections ?

    > The most fundamental problem seems to be that I can't tell currnt Linux
    > kernels that the dcache/icache is precious, and that it's way too eager
    > to dump dcache and icache in favour of data blocks. If I could do that,
    > this problem would be much, much smaller.

    I often have this problem on some of my machines after slocate runs.
    Everything is consumed in dcache/icache and no data blocks are cacheable
    anymore. I never found a way to tell the kernel to assign a higher prio
    to data than to [di]cache. To remedy this, I wrote this stupid program that
    I run when I need to free memory. It does simply allocate the memory size
    I ask, which causes a flush of the [di]caches, and when it exits, this
    memory is usable again for data blocks.

    I'm not sure it would be easy to automatically run such a thing, but
    maybe it could sometimes help when the [id]caches are too fat.

    Willy

    #include <stdio.h>
    main(int argc, char **argv) {
    unsigned long int i,k=0, max;
    char *p;

    max = (argc>1) ? atol(argv[1]) : 102400; // default to 100 MB
    printf("Allocating %lu kB...\n",max);
    while (((p=(char *)malloc(1048576))!=NULL) && (k+1024<=max)) {
    for (i=0;i<256;p[4096*i++]=0); /* mark block dirty */
    k+=1024;
    fprintf(stderr,"\r%d kB allocated",k);
    }
    fprintf(stderr,"\nMemory freed.\n");
    exit(0);
    }

    -
    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: 2007-01-06 20:39    [W:0.022 / U:33.036 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site