From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: peterz@infradead.org (Peter Zijlstra) Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 12:06:00 +0200 Subject: [PATCH/RFCv4 0/6] The Contiguous Memory Allocator framework In-Reply-To: References: <1282310110.2605.976.camel@laptop> <20100825155814.25c783c7.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20100825173125.0855a6b0@bike.lwn.net> <1282810811.1975.246.camel@laptop> Message-ID: <1282817160.1975.476.camel@laptop> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, 2010-08-26 at 18:29 +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > As I said following mail, I said about free space problem. > Of course, compaction could move anon pages into somewhere. > What's is somewhere? At last, it's same zone. > It can prevent fragment problem but not size of free space. > So I mean it would be better to move it into another zone(ex, HIGHMEM) > rather than OOM kill. Real machines don't have highmem, highmem sucks!! /me runs Does cross zone movement really matter, I though these crappy devices were mostly used on crappy hardware with very limited memory, so pretty much everything would be in zone_normal.. no? But sure, if there's really a need we can look at maybe doing cross zone movement.