From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 17:33:59 +0200 (CEST) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: mingo@elte.hu Subject: Re: the new VM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Alan Cox Cc: Andrea Arcangeli , Marcelo Tosatti , Linus Torvalds , Rik van Riel , Roger Larsson , MM mailing list , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 25 Sep 2000, Alan Cox wrote: > Unless Im missing something here think about this case > > 2 active processes, no swap > > #1 #2 > kmalloc 32K kmalloc 16K > OK OK > kmalloc 16K kmalloc 32K > block block > > so GFP_KERNEL has to be able to fail - it can wait for I/O in some > cases with care, but when we have no pages left something has to give you are right, i agree that synchronous OOM for higher-order allocations must be preserved (just like ATOMIC allocations). But the overwhelming majority of allocations is done at page granularity. with multi-page allocations and the need for physically contiguous buffers, the problem cannot be solved. Ingo -- 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.eu.org/Linux-MM/