Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:43:44 +0200 (CEST) | | From | Ingo Molnar <> | | Subject | Re: the new VM |
| |
On Mon, 25 Sep 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> At least Linus's point is that doing perfect accounting (at least on > the userspace allocation side) may cause you to waste resources, > failing even if you could still run and I tend to agree with him. > We're lazy on that side and that's global win in most cases.
well, as i said, i agree that being lazy on the user-space side (which is by far the biggest RAM allocator in a typical system) makes sense - and we can handle it cleanly.
Being lazy on the kernel-space side is the default behavior for us kernel hackers :-) but i dont think it's the right thing in the long term.
> We are finegrined with page granularity, not with the mmap > granularity. The point is that not all the mmapped regions are going > to be pagedin. Think a program that only after 1 hour did all the > calculations that allocated all the memory it requested with malloc. > Before the hour passes the unused memory can still be used for other > things and that's what the user also expects when he runs `free`.
i think you've completely missed the fact that i made exactly this point in my previous mail.
'user-space laziness': correct 'kernel-space laziness': dangerous
i talked about GFP_KERNEL, not GFP_USER. Even in the case of GFP_USER i believe the right place to oom is via a signal, not in the gfp() case. (because oom situation in the gfp() case is a completely random and statistical event, which might have no connection at all to the behavior of that given process.)
Ingo
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |