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    [W:0.022 / U:0.648 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site