Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 00:51:31 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>, Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>, Kirk McKusick <mckusick@mckusick.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: softdep panic due to blocked malloc (with traceback) Message-ID: <20001108005130.R5112@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <29940.973666955@critter>; from phk@critter.freebsd.dk on Wed, Nov 08, 2000 at 08:02:35AM %2B0100 References: <20001107152836.I5112@fw.wintelcom.net> <29940.973666955@critter>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> [001108 00:46] wrote: > In message <20001107152836.I5112@fw.wintelcom.net>, Alfred Perlstein writes: > > >> Could we please have an eventhandler chain which gets called when > >> we are short of KVM ? There are code which can free KVM with no > >> significant loss of anything but performance, if only we bother to > >> tell it to do so. > > > >Wait a second, didn't you argue against doing this when I proposed it > >nearly a year ago? > > I argued against having only two colors and in favour of three (or > more) colors. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to be short with you, what I remeber is you being very against callbacks into subsystems to free the RAM, basically only doing the "free 2, allocate 1" thing when you normally entered a subsystem, not during a callback which has a lot of lock ordering problems (your point if I remeber correctly). Callbacks can be a bad idea because of lock ordering as well as possible resource allocation recursion. -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001108005130.R5112>