From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fred.muc.de (noidentity@ns2008.munich.netsurf.de [195.180.232.8]) by kvack.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA01310 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 1999 09:47:22 -0400 Message-ID: <19990426154524.A749@kali.munich.netsurf.de> Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 15:45:24 +0200 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: 2.2.6_andrea2.bz2 References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: ; from Eric W. Biederman on Mon, Apr 26, 1999 at 10:05:56AM +0200 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: "Eric W. Biederman" , Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Chuck Lever , linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, Apr 26, 1999 at 10:05:56AM +0200, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > >>>>> "AA" == Andrea Arcangeli writes: > > >>> o update_shared_mappings (will greatly improve performances while > >>> writing from many task to the same shared memory). > >> > >> do you have performance numbers on this? > > AA> The performance optimization can be huge. > > AA> The reason this my code is not in the kernel is not because it's buggy but > AA> simple because there are plans for 2.3.x (no-way for 2.2.x) to allow the > AA> file cache to be dirty (to cache also writes and not only read in the page > AA> cache). > > Andrea. The plan (at least my plan) is not to have 2 layers of buffers. > Instead it is to do all of the caching (except for perhaps superblocks, and their > kin in the page cache). brw_page will be used for both reads and writes, with > anonymouse buffer heads (at least for a start). Stupid question: do you plan to cache fs metadata in the page cache too? If yes, it is rather wasteful to use a 4K page for the usually block sized directories and other fs data like indirect blocks. How do you plan to address this problem? -Andi -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm my@address' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://humbolt.geo.uu.nl/Linux-MM/