Re: 2.4.20, .text.lock.swap cpu usage? (ibm x440)

Brian Tinsley
2003-01-10T03:32:36Z

William Lee Irwin III wrote:

>At some point in the past, I wrote:
>
>
>>>There is no extant implementation of paged stacks yet.
>>>
>>>
>
>On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 09:17:56PM -0600, Brian Tinsley wrote:
>
>
>>For the most part, this is probably a boundary condition, right? Anyone
>>that intentionally has 800+ threads in a single application probably
>>needs to reevaluate their design :)
>>
>>
>
>IMHO multiprogramming is as valid a use for memory as any other. Or
>even otherwise, it's not something I care to get in design debates
>about, it's just how the things are used.
>
I agree with the philosophy in general, but if I sit down to write a
threaded application for Linux on IA-32 and wind up with a design that
uses 800+ threads in any instance (other than a bug, which was our
case), it's time to give up the day job and start riding on the back of
the garbage truck ;)

>The only trouble is support for what you're doing is unimplemented.
>
You mean the 800+ threads or Java on Linux?

>At some point in the past, I wrote:
>
>
>>>I'm working on a different problem (mem_map on 64GB on 2.5.x). I
>>>probably won't have time to implement it in the near future, I
>>>probably won't be doing it vs. 2.4.x, and I won't have to if someone
>>>else does it first.
>>>
>>>
>
>On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 09:17:56PM -0600, Brian Tinsley wrote:
>
>
>>Is that a hint to someone in particular?
>>
>>
>
>Only you, if anyone. My intentions and patchwriting efforts on the 64GB
>and highmem multiprogramming fronts are long since public, and publicly
>stated to be targeted at 2.7. Since there isn't a 2.7 yet, 2.5-CURRENT
>must suffice until there is.
>
In all honesty, I would enjoy nothing more than contributing to kernel
development. Unfortunately it's a bit out of my scope right now (but not
forever). If I only believed aliens seeded our gene pool with clones, I
could hook up with those folks that claim to have cloned a human and get
one of me made! ;)