Re: sched-idle and disk-priorities for 2.6.X

[bill davidsen]

In article <20040123210449.GA250@xxxxxxxxxx>,
Pavel Machek  <pavel@xxxxxx> wrote:

| > > I'm afraid it needs to be more aggressive.
| > 
| > OK, is the patch below any better ?
| 
| Yes, this one actually works. When I launched two 150MB tasks, one of
| them with ulimit -m 1, the limited task yielded its memory to
| unlimited one. It worked as expected.

I'm not sure what "as expected" means with this small a limit, hopefully
not "pages its butt off." I am printing a hardcopy of the 2nd patch and
a bit of the surrounding code, and also compiling a new kernel with the
patch in place, so I can play a bit in the morning.

I also wonder if a sanity check is desirable on the minimum size. At
some point I would think the system would get a lot of overhead trying
to actually use a single 1k page :-(

Thanks for this prompt implementation, I do have a few applications
which can use it!
-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
  CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/