public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
To: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:10:45 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040107211045.GJ16720@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040107185039.GC18208@waste.org>

On Wed, Jan 07 2004, Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 03:06:40PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 05 2004, Matt Mackall wrote:
> > > This is the fourth release of the -tiny kernel tree. The aim of this
> > > tree is to collect patches that reduce kernel disk and memory
> > > footprint as well as tools for working on small systems. Target users
> > > are things like embedded systems, small or legacy desktop folks, and
> > > handhelds.
> > > 
> > > Latest release includes:
> > >  - various compile fixes for last release
> > >  - actually include Andi Kleen's bloat-o-meter this time
> > >  - optional mempool removal
> > 
> > Your CONFIG_MEMPOOL is completely broken as you are no longer giving the
> > same guarentees (you have no reserve at all). Might as well change it to
> > CONFIG_DEADLOCK instead.
> 
> It's equivalent to a pool size of zero, yes, so deadlock odds are
> significantly higher with some usage scenarios. I'll add a big fat
> warning.

Precisely. In most scenarios it makes deadlocks possible, where it was
safe before (more below).

> On the other hand, the existence of pre-allocated mempools can greatly
> increase the likelihood of starvation, oom, and deadlock on the rest
> of the system, especially as it becomes a greater percentage of the
> total free memory on a small system. In other words, I had to cut this
> corner to make running in 2M work with my config. When I merge
> CONFIG_BLOCK, it'll be more generally useful.

It needs to be carefulled tuned, definitely.

> For the sake of our other readers, I'll point out that mempool doesn't
> intrinisically reduce deadlock odds to zero unless we have a hard
> limit on requests in flight that's strictly less than pool size.

That's not true, depends entirely on usage. It's not a magic wand. And
you don't need a hard limit, you only need progress guarentee. Typically
just a single pre-allocated object can make you 100% deadlock free, if
stacking is not involved. So for most cases, I think it would be much
better if you just hard wired min_nr to 1, that would move you from 90%
to 99% safe :-)

-- 
Jens Axboe


  parent reply	other threads:[~2004-01-07 21:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-01-06  5:48 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2 Matt Mackall
2004-01-06  6:33 ` 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2 Nick Piggin
2004-01-06  6:46   ` 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2 Matt Mackall
2004-01-06  7:08     ` 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2 Nick Piggin
2004-01-10  0:46       ` 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2 Adrian Bunk
2004-01-10  0:50         ` [0/4] better i386 CPU selection Adrian Bunk
2004-01-10  0:52         ` [1/4] " Adrian Bunk
2004-01-10 11:04           ` Wichert Akkerman
2004-01-11  3:13             ` Adrian Bunk
2004-01-14 20:49               ` [-mm patch] " Adrian Bunk
2004-01-16 19:15           ` [1/4] " cliff white
2004-01-16 19:32             ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-01-17  0:01               ` Andrew Morton
2004-01-17  2:57                 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-01-19 15:14                   ` John Stoffel
2004-01-19 23:42                     ` Nick Piggin
2004-01-17  2:15               ` Adrian Bunk
2004-01-17  9:13                 ` Robert Schwebel
2004-01-20 22:10                   ` Adrian Bunk
2004-01-20 22:31                     ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-01-20 22:47                     ` George Anzinger
2004-01-17 10:01                 ` aeriksson
2004-01-10  0:57         ` [2/4] move "struct movsl_mask movsl_mask" to usercopy.c Adrian Bunk
2004-01-10  0:57         ` [3/4] proof of concept: make arch/i386/kernel/cpu/Makefile CPU specific Adrian Bunk
2004-01-10  0:58         ` [4/4] proof of concept: make arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mtrr/Makefile " Adrian Bunk
2004-01-10 22:14         ` 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2 Matt Mackall
2004-01-12  2:20           ` 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2 Nick Piggin
2004-01-07 14:06 ` 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2 Jens Axboe
2004-01-07 18:50   ` 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2 Matt Mackall
2004-01-07 19:27     ` 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2 Mitchell Blank Jr
2004-01-07 20:10       ` 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2 Matt Mackall
2004-01-07 21:41         ` 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2 Trond Myklebust
2004-01-07 21:10     ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2004-01-07 21:30       ` 2.6.1-rc1-tiny2 Matt Mackall

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20040107211045.GJ16720@suse.de \
    --to=axboe@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mpm@selenic.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox