From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751257AbWHNHjw (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Aug 2006 03:39:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751915AbWHNHjv (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Aug 2006 03:39:51 -0400 Received: from relay.2ka.mipt.ru ([194.85.82.65]:43968 "EHLO 2ka.mipt.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750867AbWHNHjv (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Aug 2006 03:39:51 -0400 Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 11:31:54 +0400 From: Evgeniy Polyakov To: Neil Brown Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , Daniel Phillips , David Miller , riel@redhat.com, tgraf@suug.ch, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Mike Christie Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/9] deadlock prevention core Message-ID: <20060814073154.GB5161@2ka.mipt.ru> References: <44DFA225.1020508@google.com> <20060813.165540.56347790.davem@davemloft.net> <44DFD262.5060106@google.com> <20060813185309.928472f9.akpm@osdl.org> <1155530453.5696.98.camel@twins> <20060813215853.0ed0e973.akpm@osdl.org> <1155531835.5696.103.camel@twins> <20060813222208.7e8583ac.akpm@osdl.org> <1155537940.5696.117.camel@twins> <17632.9097.195772.410011@cse.unsw.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17632.9097.195772.410011@cse.unsw.edu.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.7.5 (2ka.mipt.ru [0.0.0.0]); Mon, 14 Aug 2006 11:32:01 +0400 (MSD) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 05:17:29PM +1000, Neil Brown (neilb@suse.de) wrote: > Would it be too much waste to reserve one page for every idle socket? > > Does this have some fatal flaw? Yep, in some cases number of sockets is unlimited, but number of total memory they can eat is limited already as David mentioned by tcp_?mem[]. > NeilBrown -- Evgeniy Polyakov