Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 31 Dec 2001 12:23:45 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: locked page handling |
| |
Daniel Phillips wrote: > > I think we want the pages in process of being written to live on a separate > list. Pages can be pulled of that list by a separate thread, or perhaps in > the IO completion interrupt (opportunistically, if the list lock is available) > meaning kswapd would block less and waste less time examining locked pages.
Yes, possibly. Also the unlocked pages which have locked buffers, which tends to be 99% of the pages...
But then again:
- I've never seen this code disgrace itself in profiler output unless it's in already-hopelessly-confused mode.
- Personally, I wouldn't recommend anything like that without having previously done a deep analysis of the existing implementation's dynamics and behaviour. Something which would take a week (or two, given the way the elevator analysis is shaping up).
This activity is something which I have never countenanced because the code has been under continual futzing for a year.
- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |