On Wed, 17 May 2000, Rik van Riel wrote:
>On Wed, 17 May 2000, David Ford wrote:
>> Alan Cox wrote:
>>
>> > Fixed
>> > -----
>> > VM needs rebalancing or we have a bad leak
>>
>> Andrea's classzone makes things spiffy again.
>
>Spiffy but not correct and not stable under all circumstances.
Since you say "not correct" please tell me what's not correct. You say
"not stable", so please send me a bugreport. I can't fix anything if you
only say "not stable". I can only say it's correct and stable for me. I
added so many asserts that you'll for sure will hit a BUG() if there's
something wrong in my code so you almost sure can give back to me an
useful report.
The official VM of 2.3.99-pre9-pre2 with zone strict design is completly
broken and it will never work right. It can't. Period.
The classzone based memory balancing does always the right thing instead
(it's much more _correct_) because it have enough information to do the
right thing.
You don't have enough information to do the right thing and you'll never
have enough information unless you change the design as I _had_ to do to
make things working right.
I don't have enough time to release a classzone for pre9-2 right now but
I'll of course release a new one as soon as I'll have time to upgrade the
kernel to pre9-2 or whatever latest (probably on Saturday morning).
Andrea
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 23 2000 - 21:00:16 EST