On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 05:14 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:g=20 The VM is a _critical_ user of memory. And I dare say it is the _most_ important user.=20 Every user of memory relies on the VM, and we only get into trouble if the VM in turn relies on one of these users. Traditionally that has only been the block layer, and we special cased that using mempools and PF_MEMALLOC. Why do you object to me doing a similar thing for networking? The problem of circular dependancies on and with the VM is rather limited to kernel IO subsystems, and we only have a limited amount of them.=20 You talk about something generic, do you mean an approach that is generic across all these subsystems? If so, my approach would be it, I can replace mempools as we have them with the reserve system I introduce.
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 005/196] Chinese: add translation of SubmittingDrivers |
| Andrew Morton | 2.6.23-rc6-mm1 |
| Eric Paris | [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to a linux interface for on access scanning |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
git: | |
