Re: VM Requirement Document - v0.0

From: Rik van Riel (
Date: Tue Jun 26 2001 - 16:21:21 EST

On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Jason McMullan wrote:

> If we take all the motivations from the above, and list
> them, we get:
> * Don't write to the (slow,packeted) devices until
> you need to free up memory for processes.
> * Never cache reads from immediate/fast devices.
> * Keep packetized devices as continuously-idle as possible.
> Small chunks of idleness don't count. You want to have
> maximal stetches of idleness for the device.
> * Keep running processes as fully in memory as possible.

I agree with your modification, and with the obvious 4
points above ...

> * If we're getting low cache hit rates, don't flush
> processes to swap.
> * If we're getting good cache hit rates, flush old, idle
> processes to swap.

... but I fail to see this one. If we get a low cache hit
rate, couldn't that just mean we allocated too little memory
for the cache ?

I am very much interested in continuing this discussion...

Also, how would we translate all these requirements into
VM strategies ?



Executive summary of a recent Microsoft press release:
   "we are concerned about the GNU General Public License (GPL)"

- 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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 30 2001 - 21:00:15 EST