Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266188AbUFXQ4y (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:56:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266189AbUFXQ4y (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:56:54 -0400 Received: from holomorphy.com ([207.189.100.168]:59274 "EHLO holomorphy.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266188AbUFXQ4v (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:56:51 -0400 Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 09:56:29 -0700 From: William Lee Irwin III To: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Nick Piggin , Takashi Iwai , Andi Kleen , ak@muc.de, tripperda@nvidia.com, discuss@x86-64.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: 32-bit dma allocations on 64-bit platforms Message-ID: <20040624165629.GG21066@holomorphy.com> Mail-Followup-To: William Lee Irwin III , Andrea Arcangeli , Nick Piggin , Takashi Iwai , Andi Kleen , ak@muc.de, tripperda@nvidia.com, discuss@x86-64.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20040623213643.GB32456@hygelac> <20040623234644.GC38425@colin2.muc.de> <20040624112900.GE16727@wotan.suse.de> <20040624164258.1a1beea3.ak@suse.de> <20040624152946.GK30687@dualathlon.random> <40DAF7DF.9020501@yahoo.com.au> <20040624165200.GM30687@dualathlon.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040624165200.GM30687@dualathlon.random> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1117 Lines: 26 On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 01:48:47AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: >> 2.6 has the "incremental min" thing. What is wrong with that? >> Though I think it is turned off by default. On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 06:52:01PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > sysctl_lower_zone_protection is an inferior implementation of the > lower_zone_reserve_ratio, inferior because it has no way to give a > different balance to each zone. As you said it's turned off by default > so it had no tuning. The lower_zone_reserve_ratio has already been > tuned in 2.4. Somebody can attempt a conversion but it'll never be equal > since lower_zone_reserve_ratio is a superset of what > sysctl_lower_zone_protection can do. Is there any chance you could send in thise improved implementation of zone fallback watermarks and describe the deficiencies in the current scheme that it corrects? 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/