Re: [PATCH 0/8][for -mm] mem_notify v6

2008-02-19 Thread Rik van Riel
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:00:08 -0600 Paul Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Depending on what we're trying to do: 1) warn applications of swap coming soon (your case), 2) show how close we are to swapping, 3) show how much swap has happened already, 4) kill instantly if try to swap (my hpc

Re: [PATCH 0/8][for -mm] mem_notify v6

2008-02-19 Thread Rik van Riel
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 23:28:28 +0100 Pavel Machek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sounds like a job for memory limits (ulimit?), not for OOM notification, right? I suspect one problem could be that an HPC job scheduling program does not know exactly how much memory each job can take, so it can

Re: [PATCH 0/8][for -mm] mem_notify v6

2008-02-09 Thread Rik van Riel
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 01:33:49 +0900 KOSAKI Motohiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Where is the netlink interface? Polling an FD is so last century :) to be honest, I don't know anyone use netlink and why hope receive low memory notify by netlink. poll() is old way, but it works good enough.

Re: [Patch] document ext3 requirements (was Re: [RFD] Incremental fsck)

2008-01-15 Thread Rik van Riel
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 20:44:38 -0500 Daniel Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Along with this effort, could you let me know if the world actually cares about online fsck? Now we know how to do it I think, but is it worth the effort. With a filesystem that is compartmentalized and checksums

Re: [RFD] Incremental fsck

2008-01-09 Thread Rik van Riel
On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 14:52:14 +0300 Al Boldi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, but let's look at this a bit more opportunistic / optimistic. You can't play fast and loose with data integrity. Besides, if we looked at things optimistically, we would conclude that no fsck will be needed, ever :)

Re: [RFC 13/26] SLUB: Add SlabReclaimable() to avoid repeated reclaim attempts

2007-09-19 Thread Rik van Riel
Christoph Lameter wrote: Add a flag SlabReclaimable() that is set on slabs with a method that allows defrag/reclaim. Clear the flag if a reclaim action is not successful in reducing the number of objects in a slab. The reclaim flag is set again if all objects have been allocated from it.

Re: vm/fs meetup details

2007-07-05 Thread Rik van Riel
Nick Piggin wrote: Hi, The vm/fs meetup will be held September 4th from 10am till 4pm (with the option of going longer), at the University of Cambridge. I am interested. A few potential topics: - improving laptop_mode in the VFS VM to further increase battery life in laptops - repair

Re: vm/fs meetup details

2007-07-05 Thread Rik van Riel
David Chinner wrote: On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 01:40:08PM -0700, Zach Brown wrote: - repair driven design, we know what it is (Val told us), but how does it apply to the things we are currently working on? should we do more of it? I'm sure Chris and I could talk about the design elements in

Re: File system enhancement handled above the file system level.

2000-12-07 Thread Rik van Riel
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Casey Schaufler wrote: Rik van Riel wrote: You mention extra accesses, but you don't mention how many of those involve disk accesses and how many of those are never on disk but just in memory ... [snip] The difference between 2 accesses and 6 accesses

Re: Is address_mapping-host always (struct inode *)?

2000-11-15 Thread Rik van Riel
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Alexander Viro wrote: On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Daniel Phillips wrote: After quite a lot of grepping in 2.4.0-test10 I was unable to find any places where address_mapping-host is not (struct inode *) - are there any? Currently - none. As soon as block devices go to

Re: Is address_mapping-host always (struct inode *)?

2000-11-15 Thread Rik van Riel
On Wed, 15 Nov 2000, Alexander Viro wrote: On Wed, 15 Nov 2000, Rik van Riel wrote: On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Alexander Viro wrote: On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Daniel Phillips wrote: After quite a lot of grepping in 2.4.0-test10 I was unable to find any places where address_mapping-host