[lkml]   [2007]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC 0/3] Recursive reclaim (on __PF_MEMALLOC)
    On Wed, 5 Sep 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:

    > However I really have an aversion to the near enough is good enough way of
    > thinking. Especially when it comes to fundamental deadlocks in the VM. I
    > don't know whether Peter's patch is completely clean yet, but fixing the
    > fundamentally broken code has my full support.

    Uhh. There are already numerous other issues why the VM is failing that is
    independent of Peter's approach.

    > I hate it that there are theoretical bugs still left even if they would
    > be hit less frequently than hardware failure. And that people are really
    > happy to put even more of these things in :(

    Theoretical bugs? Depends on one's creativity to come up with them I
    guess. So far we do not even get around to address the known issues and
    this multi subsystem patch has the potential of creating more.

    > Anyway, as you know I like your patch and if that gives Peter a little
    > more breathing space then it's a good thing. But I really hope he doesn't
    > give up on it, and it should be merged one day.

    Using the VM to throttle networking is a pretty bad thing because it
    assumes single critical user of memory. There are other consumers of
    memory and if you have a load that depends on other things than networking
    then you should not kill the other things that want memory.
    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: 2007-09-05 14:17    [W:0.023 / U:1.908 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site