| Date | Thu, 24 Jun 2004 09:56:29 -0700 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: [discuss] Re: 32-bit dma allocations on 64-bit platforms |
| |
On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 01:48:47AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: >> 2.6 has the "incremental min" thing. What is wrong with that? >> Though I think it is turned off by default.
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 06:52:01PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > sysctl_lower_zone_protection is an inferior implementation of the > lower_zone_reserve_ratio, inferior because it has no way to give a > different balance to each zone. As you said it's turned off by default > so it had no tuning. The lower_zone_reserve_ratio has already been > tuned in 2.4. Somebody can attempt a conversion but it'll never be equal > since lower_zone_reserve_ratio is a superset of what > sysctl_lower_zone_protection can do.
Is there any chance you could send in thise improved implementation of zone fallback watermarks and describe the deficiencies in the current scheme that it corrects?
Thanks.
-- wli - 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/
|