From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:36:46 -0300 From: Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: [RFC] memory defragmentation to satisfy high order allocations Message-ID: <20041008153646.GJ16028@logos.cnet> References: <20041008100010.GB16028@logos.cnet> <20041008.212319.19886370.taka@valinux.co.jp> <20041008124149.GI16028@logos.cnet> <20041009.015239.74741436.taka@valinux.co.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041009.015239.74741436.taka@valinux.co.jp> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Hirokazu Takahashi Cc: iwamoto@valinux.co.jp, haveblue@us.ibm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Sat, Oct 09, 2004 at 01:52:39AM +0900, Hirokazu Takahashi wrote: > Hi, Marcelo. > > > > > > > That is, if we can't migrate the page, try to write it out? > > > > > > > > I just didnt understand the logic very well, maybe I should just > > > > go reread the code. > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > I'm thinking about how to implement a nonblocking version of generic_migrate_page(). > > > > For this purpose its really bad to allocate swap space to anonymous pages, well > > need to figure out someother way of blocking the users via pagetablefault. > > > > Like a "virtual" swap space but without allocating swap map space. > > I've also ever thought to implement such a device. > It would be nice if you can design it simple. > > Mr.Iwamoto thought otherwise and posted another opinion on the lhms > list, though. I felt it also has a point. > > iwamoto> I don't think requiring swap is a big deal. If you don't have a > iwamoto> dedicated swap device, which case I think unusual, you can swapon a > iwamoto> regular file. Sure its not a big deal, but nicer if it doesnt require swap. For memory defragmentation it is a big deal. -- 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: aart@kvack.org