linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Removal of lumpy reclaim

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4F83737B.7040308@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 09 Apr 2012 19:40:43 -0400
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Removal of lumpy reclaim

On 04/09/2012 03:18 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2012, Rik van Riel wrote:

>> I could see NOMMU being unable to use compaction, but
>
> Yes, COMPACTION depends on MMU.
>
>> chances are lumpy reclaim would be sufficient for that
>> configuration, anyway...
>
> That's an argument for your patch in 3.4-rc, which uses lumpy only
> when !COMPACTION_BUILD.  But here we're worrying about Mel's patch,
> which removes the lumpy code completely.

Sorry, that was a typo in my mail.

I wanted to say that I expect lumpy reclaim to NOT be
sufficient for NOMMU anyway, because it cannot reclaim
lumps of memory large enough to fit a new process.

-- 
All rights reversed
--
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/