lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [May]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: MM patches (was Re: why swap at all?)
    Date
    On Saturday 29 May 2004 10:40, Nick Piggin wrote:

    > It is a cocktail of cleanups, simplification, and enhancements. The
    > main ones that applie here is my split active lists patch (search
    > archives for details), and explicit use-once logic.

    I didn't have time to personally test it but just want to share some thoughts.
    This kind of improvement is absolutely necessary for 2.6 to be usefull on the
    desktop. It continues to escape me how come that this kind of, almost, bugfix
    arrives so late during stable period.

    Unfortunately it doesn't apply on top of Con's autoregulate swappines (AM from
    now on) which I am currently testing. AM also does an excellent job in
    preventing swap trashing while doing a lot of filesystem reading.

    I am curious on how does your patch technically relates to Con's AM, and is it
    possible to merge the two? I know that they do their job on completely
    different ways, so the real question would be: Is there a need for something
    like AM if using your patch, or it completely obsoletes it?

    -
    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 14:03    [W:3.882 / U:0.384 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site