lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Oct]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] my latest oom stuff
On Sun, 25 Oct 1998, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 1998, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >
> > This effectively removes realtime priority from kswapd
> > -- this is plain wrong because we need to rely on kswapd
> > even in triple-digit loads...
>
> No. kswapd should NOT be real-time. It should not have been real-time in
> the first place.

> The _only_ thing kswapd is good for is to "even out" the peaks, so
> that when processes need memory they normally don't have to free
> anything themselves. Essentially, kswapd should be seen as a idle
> deamon that tries to make memory available in the background
> (arguing very strongly against kswapd ever being considered
> real-time).

I know about get_free_pages() freeing up memory --
I put that 'emergency' code in there when kswapd
couldn't cut it.

Please remember that kswapd was put in because we
didn't want 'innocent' processes to do the kernel's
dirty work.

Relegating kswapd to hardly more than idle status puts
us back to where we were with Linux 1.1...

Besides, does it make that much difference whether
an RT task has to do MM work itself or if it is
blocked by kswapd?

cheers,

Rik -- typing slowly because my kbd is dvorak since sun 19:40...
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Linux memory management tour guide. H.H.vanRiel@phys.uu.nl |
| Scouting Vries cubscout leader. http://www.phys.uu.nl/~riel/ |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:45    [W:0.121 / U:0.264 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site