Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 3 Feb 2004 20:13:36 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: sched-idle and disk-priorities for 2.6.X |
| |
Hi!
> | > > I'm afraid it needs to be more aggressive. > | > > | > OK, is the patch below any better ? > | > | Yes, this one actually works. When I launched two 150MB tasks, one of > | them with ulimit -m 1, the limited task yielded its memory to > | unlimited one. It worked as expected. > > I'm not sure what "as expected" means with this small a limit, hopefully > not "pages its butt off." I am printing a hardcopy of the 2nd patch and > a bit of the surrounding code, and also compiling a new kernel with the > patch in place, so I can play a bit in the morning.
Well, it should mean "all the memory from this process should be reclaimed if it is needed".
> I also wonder if a sanity check is desirable on the minimum size. At > some point I would think the system would get a lot of overhead trying > to actually use a single 1k page :-(
I believe it is okay as is. It just gives it very low "memory-priority".
Pavel -- When do you have a heart between your knees? [Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?] - 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/
| |