Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 16 Sep 2001 23:47:00 +0100 | From | Alex Bligh - linux-kernel <> | Subject | Re: broken VM in 2.4.10-pre9 |
| |
X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
--On Sunday, 16 September, 2001 2:28 PM -0700 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> wrote:
> - age a non-referenced page on a list: move to "next" list downwards (ie > free if already inactive, move to inactive if currently active)
Do you still make the distinction between Inactive Clean and Inactive Dirty (& just move to appropriate list)?
Effectively this is just a 'binary' aging function (OK position on the list matters too). Others on the list have observed page->age performs in a binary manner anyhow with exponential aging.
How do you balance between Inactive Clean before Inactive Dirty and avoid evicting many (infrequently used) code pages at the expense of many (historic, even less frequently used) dirty data pages? Or don't we care?
-- Alex Bligh - 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/
|  |