> Dave Hansen wrote:
> >> It is often hard to tell
> >> whether this is because the area is too small, or just too fragmented. This
> LDT's were formerly allocated in vmallocspace. This presented difficulties
> with many simultaneous threaded applications. Also, given that there is
> zero vmallocspace OOM recovery now present in the kernel some method of
> monitoring this aspect of system behavior up until the point of failure is
> useful for detecting further problem areas (LDT's were addressed by using
> non-vmalloc allocations).
>
> Also, dynamic vmalloc allocations may very well be starved by boot-time
> allocations on systems where much vmallocspace is required for IO memory.
> The failure mode of such is effectively deadlock, since they block
> indefinitely waiting for permanent boot-time allocations to be freed up.
Thank you!! How difficult would it be to back-port this to 2.4.18?
-- Take Your Trading to the Next Level! M. Edward Borasky, Meta-Trading Coachznmeb@borasky-research.net http://www.borasky-research.net/Meta-Trading-Coach.htm http://groups.yahoo.com/group/meta-trading-coach
ransacked: participated in a sack race.
- 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/