MinChan Kim wrote:
quoted text
> Hi peter,
> 
> I agree with you.  but if application's virtual address space is big,
> we have a hard problem with mlockall since memory pressure might be a
> big.
> Of course, It will be a RT application design problem.
> 
>> The much more important case is desktop usage - that is where we run non
>> real-time code, but do expect 'low' latency due to user-interaction.
>>
>> >From hitting swap on my 512M laptop (rather frequent occurance) I know
>> we can do better here,..
>>
> 
> Absolutely. It is another example. So, I suggest following patch.
> It's based on idea of Takenori Nagano's memory reclaim more efficiently.

Hi Kim-san,

Thank you for agreeing with me.

I have one question.
My patch don't mind priority. Why do you need "priority == 0"?

Thanks,
  Takenori
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/