Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 17 Jul 2002 17:37:36 -0300 (BRT) | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: [patch 1/13] minimal rmap |
| |
On Wed, 17 Jul 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> It can be fixed in kernel too, it's just that the effort would be poorly > spent at this point. This is in roughly the same category as process-level > paging policy: yes, if it's implemented properly the VM appears to work > better and users will post nice things on lkml about it, but it's a red > herring. Such adjustments are better left for later in the cycle, when > the smoke has cleared from the basic merge, and benchmarks should focus > narrowly on behaviour that is actually affected by the change in scanning > strategy.
I don't agree with this, for a very simple reason.
The current rmap patch was created in order to change the VM behaviour as little as possible and ONLY provide an infrastructure. Benchmarking a completely untuned thing that was built to not change anything is bound to give meaningless results.
I say we _use_ the infrastructure that akpm is trying to get merged now in order to implement something useful.
Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH".
http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
- 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/
| |