Re: [Ksummit-2005-discuss] Summary of 2005 Kernel Summit Proposed Topics
From: Rik van Riel <hidden>
Date: 2005-03-28 04:50:53
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2005-04-04 · Re: [Ksummit-2005-discuss] Summary of 2005 Kernel Summit Proposed Topics · Rick Jones <hidden>
- 2005-04-04 · Re: [Ksummit-2005-discuss] Summary of 2005 Kernel Summit Proposed Topics · Grant Grundler <hidden>
- 2005-04-02 · Re: [Ksummit-2005-discuss] Summary of 2005 Kernel Summit Proposed Topics · Ming Zhang <hidden>
- 2005-04-02 · Re: [Ksummit-2005-discuss] Summary of 2005 Kernel Summit Proposed Topics · Dmitry Yusupov <hidden>
- 2005-03-30 · Re: [Ksummit-2005-discuss] Summary of 2005 Kernel Summit Proposed Topics · Grant Grundler <hidden>
On Sun, 27 Mar 2005, David S. Miller wrote:
On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 22:54:11 -0500 (EST) Rik van Riel [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
(SO_MEMALLOC?)Interesting top-down scheme. We could also make a way to adjust the GFP_ATOMIC reserve thresholds too. That seems a bit more generic.
That might work, as long as we can guarantee that each SO_MEMALLOC socket has at least N amount of memory available just for itself, so none of these sockets get to deadlock. -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan