Re: ZONE_PADDING wastes 4 bytes of the new cacheline

[Andrew Morton]

Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I'm still unsure if the 2.6 lower_zone_protection completely mimics the
>  2.4 lowmem_zone_reserve algorithm if tuned by reversing the pages_min
>  settings accordingly, but I believe it's easier to drop it and replace
>  with a clear understandable API that as well drops the pages_min levels
>  that have no reason to exists anymore

I'd be OK with wapping over to the watermark version, as long as we have
runtime-settable levels.

But I'd be worried about making the default values anything other than zero
because nobody seems to be hitting the problems.

But then again, this get discussed so infrequently that by the time it
comes around again I've forgotten all the previous discussion.  Ho hum.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/