![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:53:37 +1000 Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote: > > >>Not that I want to say anything about swap prefetch getting merged: my >>inbox is already full of enough "helpful suggestions" about that, > > > give them the kernel interfaces, they can do it themselves ;) It is a good idea if we can give enough to get started. Then if they run into something they really need to do in the kernel, we can take a look. Page eviction order / prefetch-back-in-order might be tricky to expose. >>so I'll >>just be happy to have a look at little things like updatedb. > > > Yes, that is a little thing. I mean, even if the kernel's behaviour > during an updatedb run was "perfect" (ie: does what we the designers > curently intend it to do (whatever that is)) then the core problem isn't > solved: short-term workload evicts your working set and you have to > synchronously reestablish it. Sure, I know and I was never against swap (and/or file) prefetching to solve this problem. I'm just saying, I'm staying out of that :) -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. - 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: 2007-07-26 08:21 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||