From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/6] Critical Page Pool From: Alan Cox In-Reply-To: <20051214120152.GB5270@opteron.random> References: <439FCECA.3060909@us.ibm.com> <20051214100841.GA18381@elf.ucw.cz> <20051214120152.GB5270@opteron.random> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 13:03:56 +0000 Message-Id: <1134565436.25663.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Pavel Machek , Matthew Dobson , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sridhar Samudrala , Andrew Morton , Linux Memory Management List-ID: On Mer, 2005-12-14 at 13:01 +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:08:41AM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > because reserved memory pool would have to be "sum of all network > > interface bandwidths * ammount of time expected to survive without > > network" which is way too much. > > Yes, a global pool isn't really useful. A per-subsystem pool would be > more reasonable... The whole extra critical level seems dubious in itself. In 2.0/2.2 days there were a set of patches that just dropped incoming memory on sockets when the memory was tight unless they were marked as critical (ie NFS swap). It worked rather well. The rest of the changes beyond that seem excessive. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org