From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from orion.sas.upenn.edu (ORION.SAS.UPENN.EDU [165.123.26.31]) by kvack.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA22338 for ; Sun, 10 Jan 1999 14:24:37 -0500 Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 14:23:26 -0500 (EST) From: Vladimir Dergachev Subject: Re: Results: pre6 vs pre6+zlatko's_patch vs pre5 vs arcavm13 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Steve Bergman , Andrea Arcangeli , brent verner , "Garst R. Reese" , Kalle Andersson , Zlatko Calusic , Ben McCann , bredelin@ucsd.edu, linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu, linux-mm@kvack.org, Alan Cox , "Stephen C. Tweedie" List-ID: > This shows up mainly on small memory machines, because on large memory > machines we still have a lot of choice about what to free up, so it's not > all that much of a problem. > > But basically it seems that the reason pre-5 was so good was simply due to > the bug that allowed it to deadlock. Sad, because there's no way I can > re-introduce that nice behaviour without re-introducing the bug ;( Stupid question: is it possible to teach it to recognize the deadlock ? If I understand things right "nice behaviour" happens when we don't have the deadlock and the deadlock occurs not very often. So we might check once a second whether we have been low on memory for a while with a lot of swap available and if so revert to "bug-proof" behaviour. Vladimir Dergachev -- This is a majordomo managed list. To unsubscribe, send a message with the body 'unsubscribe linux-mm me@address' to: majordomo@kvack.org