uot;
> >> Date: Jul 28, 2016 7:57 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [RFC] can we use vmalloc to alloc thread stack if compaction
> >> failed
> >> To: "Andy Lutomirski"
> >> Cc: "Xishi Qiu" , "Michal Hocko"
> >> , "Tejun Heo&qu
On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 10:30 PM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 12:47:38PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> -- Forwarded message --
>> From: "Joonsoo Kim"
>> Date: Jul 28, 2016 7:57 PM
>> Subject: Re: [RFC] can we use vmallo
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 12:47:38PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: "Joonsoo Kim"
> Date: Jul 28, 2016 7:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [RFC] can we use vmalloc to alloc thread stack if compaction
> failed
> To: "Andy Lutomir
-- Forwarded message --
From: "Joonsoo Kim"
Date: Jul 28, 2016 7:57 PM
Subject: Re: [RFC] can we use vmalloc to alloc thread stack if compaction failed
To: "Andy Lutomirski"
Cc: "Xishi Qiu" , "Michal Hocko"
, "Tejun Heo" , &qu
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 08:07:51AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 3:51 AM, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> > On 2016/7/28 17:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu 28-07-16 16:45:06, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> >>> On 2016/7/28 15:58, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >>>
> On Thu 28-07-16 15:41:53,
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 3:51 AM, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> On 2016/7/28 17:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
>> On Thu 28-07-16 16:45:06, Xishi Qiu wrote:
>>> On 2016/7/28 15:58, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>
On Thu 28-07-16 15:41:53, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> On 2016/7/28 15:20, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
>> On
On 2016/7/28 17:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 28-07-16 16:45:06, Xishi Qiu wrote:
>> On 2016/7/28 15:58, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu 28-07-16 15:41:53, Xishi Qiu wrote:
On 2016/7/28 15:20, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 28-07-16 15:08:26, Xishi Qiu wrote:
>> Usually THREAD
On Thu 28-07-16 16:45:06, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> On 2016/7/28 15:58, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > On Thu 28-07-16 15:41:53, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> >> On 2016/7/28 15:20, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu 28-07-16 15:08:26, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> Usually THREAD_SIZE_ORDER is 2, it means we need to alloc
On 2016/7/28 15:58, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 28-07-16 15:41:53, Xishi Qiu wrote:
>> On 2016/7/28 15:20, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu 28-07-16 15:08:26, Xishi Qiu wrote:
Usually THREAD_SIZE_ORDER is 2, it means we need to alloc 16kb continuous
physical memory during fork a new pr
On Thu 28-07-16 15:41:53, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> On 2016/7/28 15:20, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > On Thu 28-07-16 15:08:26, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> >> Usually THREAD_SIZE_ORDER is 2, it means we need to alloc 16kb continuous
> >> physical memory during fork a new process.
> >>
> >> If the system's memory is v
On 2016/7/28 15:20, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 28-07-16 15:08:26, Xishi Qiu wrote:
>> Usually THREAD_SIZE_ORDER is 2, it means we need to alloc 16kb continuous
>> physical memory during fork a new process.
>>
>> If the system's memory is very small, especially the smart phone, maybe there
>> is
On Thu 28-07-16 15:08:26, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> Usually THREAD_SIZE_ORDER is 2, it means we need to alloc 16kb continuous
> physical memory during fork a new process.
>
> If the system's memory is very small, especially the smart phone, maybe there
> is only 1G memory. So the free memory is very smal
Usually THREAD_SIZE_ORDER is 2, it means we need to alloc 16kb continuous
physical memory during fork a new process.
If the system's memory is very small, especially the smart phone, maybe there
is only 1G memory. So the free memory is very small and compaction is not
always success in slowpath(__
13 matches
Mail list logo
