Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 24 Jun 2004 11:13:11 -0700 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: [discuss] Re: 32-bit dma allocations on 64-bit platforms |
| |
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 08:02:56PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > I'm talking to Andrew about this very issue since december 2002, so I > mostly giveup except for a few reminders like this one today. > http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=20021206145718.GL1567%40dualathlon.random&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dlinus%2Bgoogle%2Bfix%2Bmin%2Bwatermarks%26hl%3D > I'm confident as people starts to run into the zone inbalance with 2.6 > and as google upgrades to 2.6, eventually lowmem_zone_reserve_ratio will > be forward ported to 2.4.26 to 2.6. I'm not the guy with >4G of ram > anyways, so it won't be myself having troubles with this ;). > Furthermore if you have some swap, the VM can normally relocate the > stuff (you've to be quite unlucky to be filled by pure ptes in the > lowmem zone but it can happen too, but certainly not in my or Andrew's > boxes where we have not more than 2M of ptes anytime allocated).
This sounds like the more precise fix would be enforcing a stricter fallback criterion for pinned allocations. Pinned userspace would need zone migration if it's done selectively like this.
Thanks.
-- wli - 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/
| |