From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 05:21:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 05:21:46 -0400 Received: from fenrus.demon.co.uk ([158.152.228.152]:31659 "EHLO amadeus.home.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 05:21:30 -0400 Message-Id: Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001 10:21:42 +0100 (BST) From: arjan@fenrus.demon.nl To: torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds) Subject: Re: 2.4.10-pre3 - bug report cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200109020348.f823mCs01183@penguin.transmeta.com> X-Newsgroups: fenrus.linux.kernel User-Agent: tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (Linux/2.4.3-6.0.1 (i586)) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In article <200109020348.f823mCs01183@penguin.transmeta.com> you wrote: > These are bounce buffer allocations - they do fail, but the failures > should be temporary and the machine should make progress. The patch I sent to linux-mm a week ago fixes this for "normal" loads. It obviously doesn't fix the worst case scenario, but in the testing in the Red Hat lab we've seen it 1) improve performance and 2) get rid of VM problems caused by highmem; under normal load. Under the insane load we also put our kernels on, it doesn't make much difference, the obvious deadlock is still there. Greetings, Arjan van de Ven