On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 09:53:09PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > Hello Marcelo, > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 01:04:13PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > Out of curiosity, that was SuSE not mainline ? > > yep. > > > Do we really want to limit dirty cache to low mem on HIGHIO capable > > machines? I'm afraid doing so might hurt performance on such systems. > > > > I think it might be wise to have nr_free_buffer_pages() take highmem > > into account if CONFIG_HIGHIO is set ? > > The problem is the buffercache/blkdev-pagecache: it simply can't go in > highmem. A similar fix happened recently in 2.6 for the same reasons, > but in 2.6 we allowed it with some logic specific for the > blkdev-pagecache.
Right, I dont think it is easy nor wanted to make that distiction in v2.4. > nr_free_buffer_pages() was never intended to take highmem into account, > that's why there's the GFP_USER thing already, except we didn't loop > into the zonelist, so I didn't try to make a fix similar to 2.6. Hopefully it is not a big deal to not-allow >1GB dirty pagecache on v2.4. Applied, thanks. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
