Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 25 Sep 2000 02:17:14 -0400 (EDT) | From | Alexander Viro <> | Subject | Re: [patch] vmfixes-2.4.0-test9-B2 |
| |
On Sun, 24 Sep 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I'm not claiming that the buffer cache accesses would go away - I'm just > saying that the unbalanced "only buffer cache" case should go away, > because things like "find" and friends will still cause mostly page cache > activity. > > (Considering the size of the inode on ext2, I don't know how true this is, > I have to admit. It might still be quite biased towards the buffer cache, > and as such the additional page cache pressure might not be enough to > really cause any major shift in balancing).
Hrrrmmm... You know, since we don't have to associate struct inode with every address space and inode table _is_ a linear array, after all... We might put it into pagecache too. Very few places access the on-disk inode, so it's not too horrible. All we need is readpage() and that's very easy, considering the fact that allocation is static. prepare_write() and commit_write() may be NULL for all I care and writepage() will be easy too - no holes, no allocation, no nothing. Looks like we need to deal with ext2_update_inode(), ext2_read_inode() and that's it. Even less intrusive than directory stuff...
Comments?
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |