From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 05:45:08 -0700 Message-Id: <200004261245.FAA03090@pizda.ninka.net> From: "David S. Miller" In-reply-to: <20000426132915.J3792@redhat.com> (sct@redhat.com) Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.3.99-pre6-3+ VM rebalancing References: <20000426120130.E3792@redhat.com> <20000426132915.J3792@redhat.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: sct@redhat.com Cc: riel@nl.linux.org, sim@stormix.com, jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com, andrea@suse.de, linux-mm@kvack.org, bcrl@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu List-ID: If you start treating swap exactly the same, on a page-by-page LRU, then a filesystem "find" scan will swap out most of your VM. Bad news. I never got the impression from the original posting that swap pages would be treated "exactly" the same, and any sane LRU implementation which included swap and anonymous pages would prefer clean page liberation to dirty page liberation. I consider this a given. Later, David S. Miller davem@redhat.com -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/