From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Sridhar Samudrala <sri@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] TCP/IP Critical socket communication mechanism
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 19:41:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051214184147.GO23384@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1134582945.8698.17.camel@w-sridhar2.beaverton.ibm.com>
> Here we are assuming that the pre-allocated critical page pool is big enough
> to satisfy the requirements of all the critical sockets.
That seems like a lot of assumptions. Is it really better than the
existing GFP_ATOMIC which works basically the same? It has a lot
more users that compete true, but likely the set of GFP_CRITICAL users
would grow over time too and it would develop the same problem.
I think if you really want to attack this problem and improve
over the GFP_ATOMIC "best effort in smaller pool" approach you should
probably add real reservations. And then really do a lot of testing
to see if it actually helps.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-12-14 18:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-14 9:12 [RFC][PATCH 0/3] TCP/IP Critical socket communication mechanism Sridhar Samudrala
2005-12-14 9:22 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-14 17:55 ` Sridhar Samudrala
2005-12-14 18:41 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2005-12-14 19:20 ` David Stevens
2005-12-15 3:39 ` Matt Mackall
2005-12-15 4:30 ` David S. Miller
2005-12-15 5:02 ` Matt Mackall
2005-12-15 5:23 ` David S. Miller
2005-12-15 5:48 ` Matt Mackall
2005-12-15 5:53 ` Nick Piggin
2005-12-15 5:56 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-12-15 8:44 ` David Stevens
2005-12-15 8:58 ` David S. Miller
2005-12-15 9:27 ` David Stevens
2005-12-15 5:42 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-15 6:06 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-12-15 7:37 ` Sridhar Samudrala
2005-12-15 8:21 ` David S. Miller
2005-12-15 8:35 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-12-15 8:55 ` [RFC] Fine-grained memory priorities and PI Kyle Moffett
2005-12-15 9:04 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-15 12:51 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-12-15 13:31 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-15 12:45 ` Con Kolivas
2005-12-15 12:58 ` Kyle Moffett
2005-12-15 13:02 ` Con Kolivas
2005-12-16 2:09 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/3] TCP/IP Critical socket communication mechanism Sridhar Samudrala
2005-12-16 17:48 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-12-16 18:38 ` Sridhar Samudrala
2005-12-21 9:11 ` Pavel Machek
2005-12-21 9:39 ` David Stevens
2005-12-14 20:16 ` Jesper Juhl
2005-12-14 20:25 ` Ben Greear
2005-12-14 20:49 ` James Courtier-Dutton
2005-12-14 21:55 ` Sridhar Samudrala
2005-12-14 22:09 ` James Courtier-Dutton
2005-12-14 22:39 ` Ben Greear
2005-12-14 23:42 ` Sridhar Samudrala
2005-12-15 1:54 ` Mitchell Blank Jr
2005-12-15 11:38 ` James Courtier-Dutton
2005-12-15 11:47 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-12-15 13:00 ` jamal
2005-12-15 13:07 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-12-15 13:32 ` jamal
[not found] <5jUjW-8nu-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <5jWYp-3K1-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <5jXhZ-4kj-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
2005-12-16 8:35 ` Bodo Eggert
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=20051214184147.GO23384@wotan.suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sri@us.ibm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).