Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:52:33 +0100 | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call |
| |
On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 12:46:16PM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 12:10:23PM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > >> I'd just bite the bullet and do the anonymous rework. Building > >> pte_chains lazily raises the issue of needing to allocate in order to > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 09:23:35PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > note that there is no need of allocate to free. > > I've no longer got any idea what you're talking about, then.
Were we able to release memory w/o rmap: yes.
Can we do it again: yes.
Can we use a bit of the released memory to release further memory more efficiently with rmap: yes.
I'm not saying it's easy to implement that, but the problem that we'll need memory to release memory doesn't exit, since it also never existed before rmap was introduced into the kernel. Sure, the early stage of the swapping would be more cpu-intensive, but that is the feature.
Andrea - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |