On Sun, 17 Sep 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 02:33:48PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > If you have a better idea for memory management, I'd
> > like to hear it ;)
>
> You know 2.4.0-test1-ac22-class++ beaten 2.4.0-test1-ac22-riel++
> under low memory scenario, right?
Btw, do you know /why/ this was the case?
I have a strong hunch this was because you moved some swap-out
pages out of the way of the rest of the pages on the LRU list.
The new VM, as integrated in -test9-pre1, does the same thing,
only for a lot more cases than your classzone patch did, achieving
the same effect, only stronger and effective in more different
situations.
Add to that page aging, and the drop-behind code that makes it
possible to do streaming IO without putting memory pressure on
the working set ....
(well, not in all cases ... drop_behind() and read-ahead don't
work for mmap() yet)
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 23 2000 - 21:00:15 EST