linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, dkegel@google.com,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/9] Use NOMEMALLOC reclaim to allow reclaim if PF_MEMALLOC is set
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 16:07:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1187705231.6114.245.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708201415260.31167@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 823 bytes --]

On Mon, 2007-08-20 at 14:17 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> > > Its not that different.
> > 
> > Yes it is, disk based completion does not require memory, network based
> > completion requires unbounded memory.
> 
> Disk based completion only require no memory if its not on a stack of 
> other devices and if the interrupt handles is appropriately shaped. If 
> there are multile levels below or there is some sort of complex 
> completion handling then this also may require memory.

I'm not aware of such a scenario - but it could well be. Still if it
would it would take a _bounded_ amount of memory per page.

Network would still differ in that it requires an _unbounded_ amount of
packets to receive and process in order to receive that completion.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2007-08-21 14:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-08-14 15:30 [RFC 0/9] Reclaim during GFP_ATOMIC allocs Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 15:30 ` [RFC 1/9] Allow reclaim via __GFP_NOMEMALLOC reclaim Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 15:30 ` [RFC 2/9] Use NOMEMALLOC reclaim to allow reclaim if PF_MEMALLOC is set Christoph Lameter
2007-08-18  7:10   ` Pavel Machek
2007-08-20 19:00     ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-20 20:17       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-08-20 20:27         ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-20 21:14           ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-08-20 21:17             ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-21 14:07               ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2007-08-21  0:39             ` Nick Piggin
2007-08-21 14:07               ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-08-23  3:38                 ` Nick Piggin
2007-08-23  9:26                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-08-23 10:11                     ` Nikita Danilov
2007-08-23 13:58                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-08-24  4:00                     ` Nick Piggin
2007-08-14 15:30 ` [RFC 3/9] Make cond_rescheds conditional on __GFP_WAIT Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 15:30 ` [RFC 4/9] Atomic reclaim: Save irq flags in vmscan.c Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 20:02   ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-14 19:12     ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 20:05       ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-08-14 20:34         ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-14 20:33       ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-14 20:42         ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 20:44           ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-14 21:15             ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 21:23               ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-14 21:26                 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 21:29                   ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-14 21:37                     ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 21:44                       ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-14 21:48                         ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 21:56                           ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-14 22:07                             ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 22:16                               ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-14 22:20                                 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 22:21                                   ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-14 22:41                                     ` Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 15:30 ` [RFC 5/9] Save irqflags on taking the mapping lock Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 15:30 ` [RFC 6/9] Disable irqs on taking the private_lock Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 15:30 ` [RFC 7/9] Save flags in swap.c Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 15:30 ` [RFC 8/9] Reclaim on an atomic allocation if necessary Christoph Lameter
2007-08-14 15:30 ` [RFC 9/9] Testing: Perform GFP_ATOMIC overallocation Christoph Lameter
2007-08-16  2:49 ` [RFC 0/9] Reclaim during GFP_ATOMIC allocs Nick Piggin
2007-08-16 20:24   ` Christoph Lameter

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1187705231.6114.245.camel@twins \
    --to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=clameter@sgi.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dkegel@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox