[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] swap_state.c thinko
- To: James Antill <james@and.org>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] swap_state.c thinko
- From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 18:20:27 -0400
- Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>, Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>, Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>, Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>, Ben LaHaise <bcrl@redhat.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>, Richard Jerrrell <jerrell@missioncriticallinux.com>, Stephen Tweedie <sct@redhat.com>, arjanv@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org
- Organization: MandrakeSoft
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.31.0104091316500.9383-100000@penguin.transmeta.com> <nnae5ompkm.fsf@code.and.org>
- Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
James Antill wrote:
> [1] Assuming that it doesn't kill performance by allocating non shared
> mappings, or chunks of swap etc. Ie. it just knows that it can
> allocate swap when it needs it later on.
Just FWIW... from my VM-ignorant standpoint, it seems like for the
no-overcommit case "reserving" swap space is a much cheaper operation
than unconditionally allocating swap space....
--
Jeff Garzik | Sam: "Mind if I drive?"
Building 1024 | Max: "Not if you don't mind me clawing at the dash
MandrakeSoft | and shrieking like a cheerleader."
--
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/