[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070711085539.GA18038@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 09:55:39 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Dave McCracken <dave.mccracken@...cle.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Mel Gorman <mel@...net.ie>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, kenchen@...gle.com,
jschopp@...tin.ibm.com, apw@...dowen.org,
kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
y-goto@...fujitsu.com, clameter@....com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: -mm merge plans -- anti-fragmentation
On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 12:11:45PM -0500, Dave McCracken wrote:
> Ok, maybe disaster is too strong a word. But any kind of order>0 allocation
> still has to be approached with fear and caution, with a well tested fallback
> in the case of the inevitable failures. How many driver writers would have
> benefited from using order>0 pages, but turned aside to other less optimal
> solutions due to their unreliability? We don't know, and probably never
> will. Those people have moved on and won't revisit that design decision.
If you look at almost any other OS they use high-order pages quite a lot.
At least Solaris, IRIX and UnixWare do.
Also not that once we have a high-order pagecache it gives a nice way
to simply reclaim a high-order page directly :)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists