On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 03:59:22PM +0200, Abraham vd Merwe wrote:
> Hi Andrea!
> > > > > In my swapless testing, I burnt HUGE amounts of CPU in flush_tlb_others().
> > > > > So we're madly trying to swap pages out and finding that there's no swap
> > > > > space. I beleive that when we find there's no swap left we should move
> > > > > the page onto the active list so we don't keep rescanning it pointlessly.
> > > >
> > > > yes, however I think the swap-flood with no swap isn't a very
> > > > interesting case to optimize.
> > >
> > > Running swapless is a valid configuration, and the kernel is doing
> > I'm not saying it's not valid or non interesting.
> > It's the mix "I'm running out of memory and I'm swapless" that is the
> > case not interesting to optimize.
> > If you're swapless it means you've enough memory and that you're not
> > running out of swap. Otherwise _you_ (not the kernel) are wrong not
> > having swap.
> The problem is that your VM is unnecesarily eating up memory and then wants
> swap. That is unacceptable. Having 90% of your memory in buffers/cache and
> then the OOM killer kicks in because nothing is free is what we're moaning
Dear, Abraham please apply this patch:
on top of a 2.4.17pre4 and then recompile, try again and send me a
bugreport if you can reproduce. thanks,
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 15 2001 - 21:00:20 EST