[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: please revert bogus patch to vmscan.c

On Mon, 29 Oct 2001, David S. Miller wrote:
> Doing range flushes is not the answer. It is going to be about
> the same cost as doing per-page flushes.

No, doing a range flush might be fine - we'd just do it _once_ per
invocation of swap_out(), and that would probably be fine.

The problem with the flush at the low level is that it's done once for
every page in the whole VM space, which is easily millions of times.

Cutting it down to once every MM would definitely be worth it.

It won't be "exact" either, but it would mean that at least the lifetime
of an optimistic TLB entry is bounded.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:12    [W:0.156 / U:2.944 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site