lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:29:10 +0900 From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> To: "MinChan Kim" <minchan.kim@...il.com> Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, "Rik van Riel" <riel@...hat.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Lee Schermerhorn" <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, "Takenori Nagano" <t-nagano@...jp.nec.com> Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] prevent incorrect oom under split_lru > > But if such emergency happen in embedded system, application can't be > > executed for some time. > > I am not sure how long time it take. > > But In some application, schedule period is very important than memory > > reclaim latency. > > > > Now, In your patch, when such emergency happen, it continue to reclaim > > page until it will scan entire page of lru list. > > It > > with my mistake, I omit following message. :( > > So, we need cut-off mechanism to reduce application latency. > So In my opinion, If we modify some code of Takenori's patch, we can > apply his idea to prevent latency probelm. Yup. Agreed with latency is as important as throughput. if anyone explain that patch have reduce some latency and no throughput degression by benchmark result, I have no objection, Of cource. Can you post any performance result? -- 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