Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 25 Aug 2006 12:04:10 -0400 | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/4] VM deadlock prevention -v5 |
| |
Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >> The basic premises is that network sockets serving the VM need undisturbed >> functionality in the face of severe memory shortage. >> >> This patch-set provides the framework to provide this. > > Hmmm.. Is it not possible to avoid the memory pools by > guaranteeing that a certain number of page is easily reclaimable?
No.
You need to guarantee that the memory is not gobbled up by another subsystem, but remains available for use by *this* subsystem. Otherwise you could still deadlock.
-- What is important? What you want to be true, or what is true? - 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/
| |