Re: x86: 4kstacks default

[Andi Kleen]

Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 11:48:45 -0700 Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> We don't have effective physical address based reclaim yet for higher order allocs.
> 
> Lumpy reclaim is supposed to be exactly that.

Also if order 1 allocs were a significant problem on i386 we must have
had lots of reports of EAGAIN on fork/clone with !4k stack kernels. I'm
not aware of an significant number of such reports (there were a few
occasionally, but that is probably normal and unavoidable and can
be caused by other things too like simply running out of lowmem)

-Andi

--
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/