lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jun]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] [RFC] tmpfs: Add FALLOC_FL_MARK_VOLATILE/UNMARK_VOLATILE handlers
On 06/10/2012 02:47 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 06/08/2012 11:45 PM, John Stultz wrote:
>
>> I *think* ideally, the pages in a volatile range should be similar to
>> non-dirty file-backed pages. There is a cost to restore them, but
>> freeing them is very cheap. The trick is that volatile ranges introduces
>
> Easier to mark them dirty.
>
>> a new relationship between pages. Since the neighboring virtual pages in
>> a volatile range are in effect tied together, purging one effectively
>> ruins the value of keeping the others, regardless of which zone they are
>> physically.
>
> Then the volatile ->writepage function can zap the whole
> object.
>

What about the concern that if we don't have swap, we'll not call
writepage on tmpfs files?

thanks
-john







\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-06-11 21:22    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans