On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Ingo Oeser wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2000 at 02:40:16PM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > There are 256 megabytes of SDRAM available. I don't think it's
> > > reasonable that a 1/2 megabyte allocation would fail, especially
> > > since it's the first module being installed.
> > If you write the defragmentation code for the VM, I'll
> > be happy to bump up the limit a bit ...
> Should become easier once we start doing physical page scannings.
> We could record physical continous freeable areas on the fly
> then. If someone asks for them later, we recheck whether they
> still exists and free (inactive_clean) or remap (active or
> inactive_dirty) the whole area, whether they are used or not.
I am confused. Why cannot one simply audit the memory usage and always
have an up-to-date list of free memory pages? When a page is allocated,
the allocator should make a call to move that page outside of the
freelist; and when it is free, just move it back to the free list. Is it
because of the overhead?
> This could still be improved by using up smallest fit areas
> first for kmalloc() based on these areas.
> But beware: We just have a good hint here, which needs to be
> rechecked every time we allocate such areas to become
> Rik: What do you think about this (physical cont. area cache) for 2.5?
> Ingo Oeser
> Feel the power of the penguin - run firstname.lastname@example.org
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to email@example.com. For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 21:00:29 EST