Re: [rfc] lockless pagecache
From: Nick Piggin
Date: Mon Jun 27 2005 - 03:31:29 EST
Andrew Morton wrote:
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Also, the memory usage regression cases that fault ahead brings makes it
a bit contentious.
faultahead consumes no more memory: if the page is present then point a pte
at it. It'll make reclaim work a bit harder in some situations.
Oh OK we'll call that faultahead and Christoph's thing prefault then.
I suspect it may still be a net loss for those that are running into
tree_lock contention, but we'll see.
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/