From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264393AbTF0Ojd (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:39:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264394AbTF0Ojd (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:39:33 -0400 Received: from mail-in-03.arcor-online.net ([151.189.21.43]:28308 "EHLO mail-in-03.arcor-online.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264393AbTF0Ojc (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:39:32 -0400 From: Daniel Phillips To: "Martin J. Bligh" , Mel Gorman Subject: Re: [RFC] My research agenda for 2.7 Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 16:54:46 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org References: <200306250111.01498.phillips@arcor.de> <23430000.1056725030@[10.10.2.4]> In-Reply-To: <23430000.1056725030@[10.10.2.4]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200306271654.46491.phillips@arcor.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 27 June 2003 16:43, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > The buddy allocator is not a good system for getting rid of fragmentation. We've talked in the past about throwing out the buddy allocator and adopting something more modern and efficient and I hope somebody will actually get around to doing that. In any event, defragging is an orthogonal issue. Some allocation strategies may be statistically more resistiant to fragmentation than others, but no allocator has been invented, or ever will be, that can guarantee that terminal fragmentation will never occur - only active defragmentation can provide such a guarantee. Regards, Daniel