On Mon, 7 Feb 2000, Kanoj Sarcar wrote:
>I hate the part of adding in more magic numbers to the balancing
>logic, unless you can demonstrate how it helps. I know, 2.2
It helps since now I avoid to waste 5mbyte of ram ;). And machines with
2mbyte of memory will try to take free 10 pages instead of 4 pages of ram.
4 pages is too low for such machines too.
>uses these magic numbers to set freepages.*, but I can't see a
>logic to having min/max for zones. It is still probably acceptable
See above.
>to have the magic numbers in 2.3 for freepages.* setting (at
>least until we have a zone aware kswapd), for global stuff. If
I think freepages.* is dead. I just wanted to remove it but actually
nobody is hurted by it so I left it there for now.
>The ZONE_BALANCED macro is currently a good way to see whether
>we really want to do more compute intensive classfree().
I don't think ZONE_BALANCED make sense. It's not the fast path. Do the
thing right, use classfree and all become obviously correct.
If you are worried by the O(n) complexity of classfree reimplement it in
O(1) but I wouldn't use ZONE_BALANCED to skip the O(n) complexity when you
are lucky (not in the fast path).
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 Feb 15 2000 - 21:00:12 EST