![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 04:08:03PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > My approach was to keep the existing design and warm it up, rather than to > redesign. Is it "good enough" now? Dunno - nobody has run the tests > with slablru. But it's probably too late for a redesign (such as per-cpu LRU, > per-mapping lru, etc). > > It would be great to make presence on the LRU contribute to > page->count, because that would permit the removal of a ton of > page_cache_get/release operations inside the LRU lock, perhaps > doubling throughput in there. Guess I should get off my lazy butt > and see what you've done (will you for heaven's sake go and buy an IDE > disk and compile up a 2.5 kernel? :)) I've at least been testing (if not at least attempting to debug) 2.5.32-mm2, which includes slablru. Cheers, Bill - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:22 [W:0.530 / U:0.110 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||