Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 11 Dec 2004 00:44:38 +0000 (GMT) | From | Hugh Dickins <> | Subject | Re: page fault scalability patch V12 [0/7]: Overview and performance tests |
| |
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004, Andrew Morton wrote: > Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com> wrote: > > But why is do_anonymous_page adding anything to lru_cache_add_active, > > when its other callers leave it at that? What's special about the > > do_anonymous_page case? > > do_swap_page() is effectively doing the same as do_anonymous_page(). > do_wp_page() and do_no_page() appear to be errant.
Demur. do_swap_page has to mark_page_accessed because the page from the swap cache is already on the LRU, and for who knows how long. The others (and count in fs/exec.c's install_arg_page) are dealing with a freshly allocated page they are putting onto the active LRU.
My inclination would be simply to remove the mark_page_accessed from do_anonymous_page; but I have no numbers to back that hunch.
Hugh
- 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/
| |