Hey Marcelo,
thx for your great work! our 4gb system are working way better
now. i am running ac5 (without your inactive_plenty() patch
on top of that) on allmost all (see below) of our big boxes.
also, it looks like the CPU affinity thing bought us also a little
something as far as i was told,
Linus Torvalds writes:
>
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Richard Gooch wrote:
> > Linus Torvalds writes:
> > > Note that the unfair aging (apart from just being a natural
> > > requirement of higher allocation pressure) actually has some other
> > > advantages too: it ends up being aload balancing thing.
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Note that the unfair aging (apart from just being a natural requirement of
> higher allocation pressure) actually has some other advantages too: it
> ends up being aload balancing thing. Sure, it might throw out some things
> that get "unfairly" treat
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Richard Gooch wrote:
> Linus Torvalds writes:
> > Note that the unfair aging (apart from just being a natural
> > requirement of higher allocation pressure) actually has some other
> > advantages too: it ends up being aload balancing thing. Sure, it
> > might throw out some t
Linus Torvalds writes:
> Note that the unfair aging (apart from just being a natural
> requirement of higher allocation pressure) actually has some other
> advantages too: it ends up being aload balancing thing. Sure, it
> might throw out some things that get "unfairly" treated, but once we
> brin
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>
> > Still able to trigger the problem with the GFP_HIGHUSER patch applied.
>
> Hrrm, maybe the fact that the free target in the DMA zone is
> four times higher than in the other zones has something to do
>
6 matches
Mail list logo
