On 04/09/2012 03:18 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Mon, 9 Apr 2012, Rik van Riel wrote:
I could see NOMMU being unable to use compaction, but
Yes, COMPACTION depends on MMU.
chances are lumpy reclaim would be sufficient for that
configuration, anyway...
That's an argument for your patch in 3.4-rc, which uses lumpy only
when !COMPACTION_BUILD. But here we're worrying about Mel's patch,
which removes the lumpy code completely.
Sorry, that was a typo in my mail.
I wanted to say that I expect lumpy reclaim to NOT be
sufficient for NOMMU anyway, because it cannot reclaim
lumps of memory large enough to fit a new process.
--
All rights reversed
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>