Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:26:17 -0300 (BRST) | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: [patch] vmfixes-2.4.0-test9-B2 - fixing deadlocks |
| |
On Mon, 25 Sep 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 07:06:57PM +0100, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: > > Good. One of the problems we always had in the past, though, was that > > getting the relative aging of cache vs. vmas was easy if you had a > > small set of test loads, but it was really, really hard to find a > > balance that didn't show pathological behaviour in the worst cases. > > Yep, that's not trivial.
It is. Just do physical-page based aging (so you age all the pages in the system the same) and the problem is solved.
> > > I may be overlooking something but where do you notice when a page > > > gets unmapped from the last mapping and put it back into a place > > > that can be reached from shrink_mmap (or whatever the cache recycler is)? > > > > It doesn't --- that is part of the design. The vm scanner propagates > > And that's the inferior part of the design IMHO.
Indeed, but physical page based aging is a definate 2.5 thing ... ;(
regards,
Rik -- "What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!" -- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000
http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/
- 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/
|  |