Hi,
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 04:35:32PM -0800, John Kennedy wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 01:04:16AM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 03:36:15PM -0800, John Kennedy wrote:
> > > No, it is all ext3fs stuff that is touching the same areas your
> >
> > Ok this now make
On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 01:04:16AM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 03:36:15PM -0800, John Kennedy wrote:
> > No, it is all ext3fs stuff that is touching the same areas your
>
> Ok this now makes sense. I ported VM-global-7 on top of ext3 right now
> but it's untested:
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 03:36:15PM -0800, John Kennedy wrote:
> No, it is all ext3fs stuff that is touching the same areas your
Ok this now makes sense. I ported VM-global-7 on top of ext3 right now
but it's untested:
ftp://ftp.us.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/andrea/patches/v2.2
On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 12:20:09AM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 03:02:35PM -0800, John Kennedy wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 02:57:01PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > > ... VM-global-*-7 has no known bugs AFIK.
> >
> > Is there anything more recent than VM-g
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 03:02:35PM -0800, John Kennedy wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 02:57:01PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > ... VM-global-*-7 has no known bugs AFIK.
>
> Is there anything more recent than VM-global-2.2.18pre18-7? It isn't
> patching very cleanly against my pre-patch-
On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 02:57:01PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> ... VM-global-*-7 has no known bugs AFIK.
Is there anything more recent than VM-global-2.2.18pre18-7? It isn't
patching very cleanly against my pre-patch-2.2.18-23 tree.
(I don't see anything under your pre19 thru pre23 di
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> VM-global-*-7 has no known bugs AFIK.
Sure, I don't use 2.2 anyway ;)
Rik
--
Hollywood goes for world dumbination,
Trailer at 11.
http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the li
+ /* Only lower priority if we didn't make progress. */
+ if (count == loopcount)
+ --priority;
+ loopcount = count;
If the while loops around the page-recycling-methods were missing we would
have just noticed as soon as we needed to
According to Rik van Riel:
> Luckily my patch fixes some of the suspect areas in
> VM-global [...]
Would you say that the below patch is just the try_to_free_pages
bug fix, then?
Index: mm/vmscan.c
--- mm/vmscan.c.prev
+++ mm/vmscan.c Fri Nov 24 15:17:59 2000
@@ -401,4 +401,5 @@ int try_to_free_
On Sun, 19 Nov 2000, Ville Herva wrote:
> My questions is: I saw Andrea's VM-global patch being
> recommended as a solution for this problem, and I already
> compiled it in (although I haven't booted into it yet). Should I
> use Rik's or Andrea's patch?
This patch is incremental with VM-global,
On Sat, Nov 18, 2000 at 10:04:02PM -0200, you [Rik van Riel] said:
> Hi Alan,
>
> here's a fix for a blindingly stupid bug that's been in
> 2.2 for ages (and which I've warned you about a few times
> in the last 6 months, and which I've even sent some patches
> for).
>
> This patch should make 2
Hi Alan,
here's a fix for a blindingly stupid bug that's been in
2.2 for ages (and which I've warned you about a few times
in the last 6 months, and which I've even sent some patches
for).
This patch should make 2.2 VM a bit more stable and should
also fix the complaints from people who's system
12 matches
Mail list logo
