lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Re: [Oops] i386 mm/slab.c (cache_flusharray)


On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 pinotj@club-internet.fr wrote:
>
> 3. 2.6.0-test10 vanilla + PREEMPT_CONFIG=y + patch printk + patch magic numbers
> The patch solves the problem, I can compile 4 times a kernel and do heavy work in parallele (load average around 1.2 during 2 hours) without any problems.

Those magic numbers don't make any sense. In particular, SLAB_LIMIT is
clearly bogus both in the original version and in the "magic number
patch". The only place that uses SLAB_LIMIT is the code that decides how
many entries fit in one slab, and quite frankly, it makes no _sense_ to
have a SLAB_LIMIT that is big enough to be unsigned.

"SLAB_LIMIT" should be something in the few hundreds, maybe.

Manfred? What is the logic behind those nonsensical numbers?

Linus
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.036 / U:1.540 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site