On Wednesday, April 06, 2011 3:27:28 pm Kostik Belousov wrote: > On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 07:04:47PM +0200, Edward Tomasz Napiera?a wrote: > > Wiadomo?? napisana przez Garrett Cooper w dniu 2011-04-06, o godz. 18:57: > > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Edward Tomasz Napierala > > > <tr...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > >> Author: trasz > > >> Date: Wed Apr 6 16:27:04 2011 > > >> New Revision: 220387 > > >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/220387 > > >> > > >> Log: > > >> In vm_daemon(), do not skip processes stopped with SIGSTOP. > > > > > > Did you run this by anyone else before you committed the change? > > > > The whole racct patchset was reviewed by kib@, and I seem to remember > > that he said this might cause problems. However, I didn't encounter > > any problems with this, neither did any person testing the patchset. > > > > So, what's wrong with this? > I remember that I disliked the whole approach of handling RSS limits, > and still hold the same opinion. > I said something about honoring the limit at the time of page allocation > or page-in, and not `offline' as it is committed, by periodic scans > by daemon.
Yes, to be truly useful the limit has to prevent excessive page allocation at the time the allocation is performed (by blocking until another page is swapped out or failing, etc.). -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
