From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from max.phys.uu.nl (max.phys.uu.nl [131.211.32.73]) by kvack.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02274 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 1998 16:52:32 -0400 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:04:38 +0200 (CEST) From: Rik van Riel Reply-To: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: TODO list, v0.01 In-Reply-To: <23752.199806161511@canna.dcs.ed.ac.uk> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Stephen Tweedie Cc: "Dr. Werner Fink" , Linux MM List-ID: On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, Stephen Tweedie wrote: > In article <19980615185647.50925@boole.suse.de>, "Dr. Werner Fink" > writes: > > > ??? == We should get a better recover time/behaviour of the mm for small > > systems under high load. Currently small systems with 2.1.10X > > (RAM < 32MB, sometimes < 64MB) do loose in comparision to 2.0.33/34. > > It's the number one problem we need to fix for 2.2. Fortunately a lot > of people are aware of the problem and we spent a lot of time talking > about it at expo and Usenix. I think we've got a good handle on how > to start tackling the obvious problems, but there will still be a lot of > tuning required before we can release a 2.2 kernel and call it stable. We should probably start with Werner's patch for linux-2.1.102 (if it hasn't been integrated yet). > I'll write up an outline of what I think we need to start doing once > I'm back from Usenix. I have the outlines for a nice and simple zone allocator. We can push this in for 2.3, it's probably too late for 2.2 :( However, if we can prove that it works correctly, we might be able to sneak it in behind Linus' back :-) Rik. +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Linux memory management tour guide. H.H.vanRiel@phys.uu.nl | | Scouting Vries cubscout leader. http://www.phys.uu.nl/~riel/ | +-------------------------------------------------------------------+