[lkml]   [1998]   [Jul]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Strange interrupt behaviour
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> This essentially keeps a few task-structs around for low memory
> situations, and should work very well in a "steady-state" situation where
> usually processes die at roughly the same rate as they get created. I
> suspect it makes the problem go away at a very low cost, but I haven't
> tested it on a low-lemory machine (or a big-memory machine either, for
> that matter - for all I know it won't even boot).


I feel that you're starting to create special cases like this all over
the place again.

Before I submitted my kmalloc, you were writing your own memory
allocator all over the place, now you're creating your own private
"cache for low memory situations". More of the same.

The "right" way to handle this, is to make kmalloc/gfp/whatever
implement this, and allow just a few places to set the flag that
enables getting stuff from the "last resort" pool.


Actor asks a collegue: "To what do you owe your success in acting?"
Answer: "Honesty. Once you've learned how to fake that, you've got it made."
-------- Custom Linux device drivers for sale! Call for a quote. ----------
Email: || Tel: +31-15-2137555 || FAX: +31-15-2138217

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:43    [W:0.225 / U:1.564 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site