On Fri, 2014-10-17 at 11:28 -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: > So long as it doesn't impact performance significantly I am fine with > it. My concern is that you are bringing up issues that none of the > customers were brining up when I was at Intel, and the fixes you are > proposing are likely to result in customers seeing things they will > report as issues. We regularly hit these issues at Google. We have memory containers, and we detect quite easily if some layer is lying, because we cant afford having 20% of headroom on our servers. I am not claiming IGB is the only offender. I am sorry if you believe it was an attack on IGB, or any network driver. truesize should really be the thing that protects us from OOM, and apparently driver authors hitting TCP performance problems thinks it is better to simply let TCP do no garbage collection. It seems that nobody cares or even understand what I am saying, so I should probably not care and suggest Google to buy PetaBytes of memory, right ? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
