[lkml]   [2003]   [Apr]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: objrmap and vmtruncate
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 07:29:02AM -0700, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> overhead itself. I think we're optimising for the wrong case here - isn't
> the 100x100 mappings case exactly what we have sys_remap_file_pages for?

yes IMHO.

> We can make the O(?) stuff look as fancy as we like. However, in reality,
> that makes the constants suck, and I'm not at all sure it's a good plan.

correct, it depends on what we care to run fast.

> It seems ironic that the solution to space consumption is do double the
> amount of space taken ;-) I see what you're trying to do (shove things up


> I think the holes in objrmap are quite small - and are already addressed by
> your sys_remap_file_pages mechanism.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:34    [W:0.117 / U:51.348 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site