lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Apr]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
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

Agreed.

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

Yep.

Andrea
-
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 13:34    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site