[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] swap_state.c thinko
- To: andrea@suse.de (Andrea Arcangeli)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] swap_state.c thinko
- From: Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 14:16:59 -0400 (EDT)
- Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds), hugh@veritas.com (Hugh Dickins), bcrl@redhat.com (Ben LaHaise), riel@conectiva.com.br (Rik van Riel), jerrell@missioncriticallinux.com (Richard Jerrrell), sct@redhat.com (Stephen Tweedie), arjanv@redhat.com, alan@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org
- In-Reply-To: <20010406222256.C935@athlon.random> from "Andrea Arcangeli" at Apr 06, 2001 10:22:56 PM
- Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
> On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 12:52:26PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > vm_enough_memory() is a heuristic, nothing more. We want it to reflect
> > _some_ view of reality, but the Linux VM is _fundamentally_ based on the
> > notion of over-commit, and that won't change. vm_enough_memory() is only
> > meant to give a first-order appearance of not overcommitting wildly. It
> > has never been anything more than that.
>
> 200% agreed.
Given that strict address space management is not that hard would you
accept patches to allow optional non-overcommit in 2.5
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/