lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jan]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: MM deadlock [was: Re: arca-vm-8...]
    On Wed, 13 Jan 1999, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
    > On Tue, 12 Jan 1999, Rik van Riel wrote:
    >
    > > IIRC this facility was in the original swapin readahead
    > > implementation. That only leaves the question who removed
    > > it and why :))
    >
    > There's another thing I completly disagree and that I just removed here.
    > It's the alignment of the offset field. I see no one point in going back
    > instead of only doing real read_ahead_.
    >
    > Maybe I am missing something?

    Yes, you are:

    - aligned reads make sure you don't do smallish readaheads of
    only 1 block (because you've already got the rest)
    - there are programs that move through the data backwards or
    tilewise
    - in allocating swap space it just doesn't make sense to read
    into the next swap 'region'

    Rik -- If a Microsoft product fails, who do you sue?
    +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
    | Linux memory management tour guide. riel@nl.linux.org |
    | Scouting Vries cubscout leader. http://www.nl.linux.org/~riel |
    +-------------------------------------------------------------------+


    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:49    [W:3.371 / U:0.696 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site