Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:43:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:43:31 -0500 Received: from brutus.conectiva.com.br ([200.250.58.146]:6133 "EHLO brutus.conectiva.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:43:25 -0500 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 17:12:07 -0200 (BRDT) From: Rik van Riel To: Andrea Arcangeli cc: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, Linus Torvalds , mingo@chiara.elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Memory management bug In-Reply-To: <20001117164422.B27098@athlon.random> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > Actually memory balancing in 2.4.x doesn't get any information, > not even the information about which _classzone_ where to free > the memory (NOTE: both 2.2.x and 2.0.x _always_ got the > classzone where to free memory at least). This classzone missing > information causes resources wastage indeed and I just fixed it > several times, BTW. Interesting, I can't remember you sending me any patches... Also, the 2.4 VM (unlike the other VMs) doesn't actually FREE memory wrongly (with the exception of buffer cache pages from page_launder()) but just moves it to the inactive_clean list, from where it will be re-used by one of those 99% user level allocations that happen on a typical Linux system. But, as I said in Ottawa, I wouldn't mind any classzone stuff in the new VM, as long as it won't complicate the integration of _other_ memory organisations (like NUMA). regards, Rik -- "What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!" -- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000 http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/