Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 28 Feb 2002 17:30:56 -0800 | From | Mike Fedyk <> | Subject | Re: 2.4.19pre1aa1 |
| |
On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 05:11:25PM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote: > On Wed, 27 Feb 2002, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > > I would like to have feedback about this VM update, if nobody can find > > any serious issue I'd try to push vm-28 into mainline during 2.4.19pre. > > Please test oom conditions as well. > > I have enjoyed using your -aa patches (and run child first) for some time, > and Rik's rmap patches as well. However, I find that for some machines > your stuff works clearly better, particularly larger memory machines, and > for some rmap is clearly more responsive, particularly for small machines > under heavy memory pressure. > > The point is that choice is good, and having two solutions two address > various machines is a good thing, even if the convenience isn't all that > great. That being said, I fear that if your solution gets pushed into > mainline that it will preempt other solutions. And my testing tells me > that there is no one solution here, even with all the tuning in your VM, > using the hints you gave me. >
The problem here is that currently the mainline kernel makes some bad dicesions in the VM, and -aa is the solution in this case. When -aa is merged, you will still have both solutions; one in mainline, one as a patch (rmap).
Linus has already changed the VM once in 2.4, and I don't really see another large VM change (rmap in 2.4) happening again.
Rmap looks promising for a 2.5 merge after several issues are overcome (pte-highmem, etc).
Mike - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |