From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: must-fix list for 2.6.0
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 20:19:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030430031914.GC8978@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030429155731.07811707.akpm@digeo.com>
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 03:57:31PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> mm/
> ---
> - Overcommit accounting gets wrong answers
> - underestimates reclaimable slab, gives bogus failures when
> dcache&icache are large.
> - gets confused by reclaimable-but-not-freed truncated ext3 pages.
> Lame fix exists in -mm.
> - Proper user level no overcommit also requires a root margin adding
I didn't notice anything specific here about sys_remap_file_pages() vs.
truncate() (sans objrmap); did a fix fly by that I didn't notice,
or was it less of an issue than I thought it was?
Also, the OOM killer fails to check lowmem; basically it just needs
- if (nr_swap_pages > 0)
+ if (nr_swap_pages > 0 && nr_free_buffer_pages() > 0)
With that in addition to the OOM killer locking patch I posted and
another to completely eliminate mm-less processes from consideration
64GB ia32 (with, of course, my oversized out-of-tree patch) recovers
from OOM instead of deadlocking after a mass-killing with swap online.
Not that I'd consider 64GB ia32 a supported platform for 2.5/2.6 (it's
a design limitation IMHO); it merely "stresses the OOM killer harder"
for the purposes of this discussion. Some kind of investigation is
probably needed to determine why eliminating mm-less processes from
consideration is necessary to obtain the desired behavior.
I'd be interested in more detailed descriptions of the user-level no
overcommit, dcacheicache, and truncated ext3 page issues after Thursday.
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 03:57:31PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> mm/
> ---
> - objrmap: concerns over page reclaim performance at high sharing levels,
> and interoperation with nonlinear mappings is hairy.
> - Readd and make /proc/sys/vm/freepages writable again so that boxes can be
> tuned for heavy interrupt load.
The latter sounds easy to address. It actually sounds like a 2.4.x
compatibility fix.
-- wli
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-04-30 3:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-29 22:57 must-fix list for 2.6.0 Andrew Morton
2003-04-29 23:22 ` John Bradford
2003-04-29 23:37 ` Andrew Morton
2003-04-30 3:19 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]
2003-04-30 4:45 ` Andrew Morton
2003-04-30 4:52 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-05-01 4:32 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-04-30 8:30 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2003-04-30 10:16 ` Maciej Soltysiak
2003-04-30 19:11 ` Andrew Morton
2003-04-30 23:11 ` Rick Lindsley
2003-04-30 23:21 ` Andrew Morton
2003-04-30 23:47 ` viro
2003-04-30 23:59 ` Andrew Morton
2003-05-01 6:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2003-05-01 5:49 ` Shawn
2003-05-01 10:14 ` Christoph Hellwig
2003-05-01 9:47 ` Alan Cox
2003-05-01 15:44 ` Robert Love
2003-05-01 0:09 ` Robert Love
2003-05-01 0:51 ` Gerrit Huizenga
2003-05-01 5:40 ` Dave Hansen
2003-05-01 11:57 ` Bill Huey
2003-04-30 23:53 ` Robert Love
2003-05-01 8:36 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-05-01 8:42 ` Andrew Morton
2003-05-01 8:47 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-04-30 23:41 ` Robert Love
2003-05-01 16:50 ` Hubertus Franke
2003-05-01 3:21 ` Mike Galbraith
2003-05-01 6:26 ` Mike Galbraith
2003-05-01 14:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2003-05-01 18:42 ` Andrew Morton
2003-05-01 18:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2003-05-02 1:57 ` Andreas Boman
[not found] <20030429155731.07811707.akpm@digeo.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
2003-04-30 1:36 ` Andi Kleen
2003-04-30 18:09 ` Pavel Machek
2003-04-30 18:15 ` Andi Kleen
2003-04-30 19:11 ` Pavel Machek
[not found] <20030429231009$1e6b@gated-at.bofh.it>
2003-04-30 4:55 ` Florian Weimer
2003-04-30 10:18 ` Maciej Soltysiak
2003-05-01 11:24 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-01 11:27 ` Florian Weimer
2003-05-01 12:03 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-01 12:05 ` David S. Miller
2003-05-02 16:28 ` Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
2003-05-02 21:14 ` David S. Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030430031914.GC8978@holomorphy.com \
--to=wli@holomorphy.com \
--cc=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).