Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 18 Sep 1999 22:27:33 +0200 (CEST) | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: kflushd rewrite... |
| |
On Sat, 18 Sep 1999, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>On Mon, 13 Sep 1999, Daniel J Blueman wrote: > >>Having looked at the source for kflushd, I did a complete re-write offering >>significantly less overhead. I am preparing a patch against 2.3.18. > >IMHO in 2.3.18* the buffer flushing code is bad. IMHO there's no way to >take it as it is for 2.4.x if we want decent cache performances (with >decent I mean at least as 2.2.x). I am rewriting the algorithms from >scratch as I just have invented my own heuristic and so now I really want >to implement them as I want my system running as I want for me. So expect >a re-write also from me.
I think my email wasn't complete and you risk to take me wrong. I don't want to suggest you to stop your work. Instead I suggest you to post your patch.
Actually I seen no patch from you yet, and unfortunately I read your announce really too late so at this point I think I'll complete my work unless your patch _completly_ obsoletes my current stuff.
But this in turn simply means that once finished we'll merge the good stuff from both the two patches to generate a still better patch, so I can't see any real issue (no panic yet ;).
Apologies if I am not been not clear. Also thanks to who pointed out to me privately that I am been not clear.
Andrea
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |