Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 26 Oct 1998 02:13:56 +0100 (CET) | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: [patch] my latest oom stuff |
| |
On Mon, 26 Oct 1998, Rik van Riel wrote:
>Relegating kswapd to hardly more than idle status puts >us back to where we were with Linux 1.1...
The efficient right/way is to free memory with the process that is sleeping I think.
>Besides, does it make that much difference whether >an RT task has to do MM work itself or if it is >blocked by kswapd?
Yes:
1. if kswapd fails it will continue to run 2. if the process fails it will be killed soon 3. you free memory only when you really need memory
Andrea Arcangeli
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |