On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 12:20:48AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> I haven't thought about it yet, but there must be some way to avoid leaving
> huge amounts of lowmem free. It should be OK to allow lowmem to be fully
> used, as long as there's sufficent reclaimable stuff in there - slab,
>
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 07:10:05PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >If you do 'echo 0 0 > /proc/sys/vm/lowmem_reserve_ratio' the kernel gets a
> >divide-by-zero.
> >
> >Prevent that, and fiddle with some whitespace too.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > If you do 'echo 0 0 > /proc/sys/vm/lowmem_reserve_ratio' the kernel gets a
> > divide-by-zero.
> >
> > Prevent that, and fiddle with some whitespace too.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Can we
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you do 'echo 0 0 > /proc/sys/vm/lowmem_reserve_ratio' the kernel gets a
divide-by-zero.
Prevent that, and fiddle with some whitespace too.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Can we instead have a patch that makes the value zero turn off the
lowmem reserve
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you do 'echo 0 0 /proc/sys/vm/lowmem_reserve_ratio' the kernel gets a
divide-by-zero.
Prevent that, and fiddle with some whitespace too.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can we instead have a patch that makes the value zero turn off the
lowmem reserve
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you do 'echo 0 0 /proc/sys/vm/lowmem_reserve_ratio' the kernel gets a
divide-by-zero.
Prevent that, and fiddle with some whitespace too.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can we instead have a patch
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 07:10:05PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you do 'echo 0 0 /proc/sys/vm/lowmem_reserve_ratio' the kernel gets a
divide-by-zero.
Prevent that, and fiddle with some whitespace too.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can we
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 12:20:48AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
I haven't thought about it yet, but there must be some way to avoid leaving
huge amounts of lowmem free. It should be OK to allow lowmem to be fully
used, as long as there's sufficent reclaimable stuff in there - slab,
blockdev
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:16:55PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> If you do 'echo 0 0 > /proc/sys/vm/lowmem_reserve_ratio' the kernel gets a
> divide-by-zero.
>
> Prevent that, and fiddle with some whitespace too.
Due to the whitespace fiddling, I'd say no to this patch, based on the
On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:16:55PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you do 'echo 0 0 /proc/sys/vm/lowmem_reserve_ratio' the kernel gets a
divide-by-zero.
Prevent that, and fiddle with some whitespace too.
Due to the whitespace fiddling, I'd say no to this patch, based on the
criteria.
If you do 'echo 0 0 > /proc/sys/vm/lowmem_reserve_ratio' the kernel gets a
divide-by-zero.
Prevent that, and fiddle with some whitespace too.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
25-akpm/mm/page_alloc.c | 21 +++--
1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 6
If you do 'echo 0 0 /proc/sys/vm/lowmem_reserve_ratio' the kernel gets a
divide-by-zero.
Prevent that, and fiddle with some whitespace too.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
25-akpm/mm/page_alloc.c | 21 +++--
1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 6
12 matches
Mail list logo