From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 18:20:21 +0100 From: Ingo Oeser Subject: Re: [PATCH] vma limited swapin readahead Message-ID: <20010201182021.N1173@nightmaster.csn.tu-chemnitz.de> References: <20010201143606.P11607@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from riel@conectiva.com.br on Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 02:45:04PM -0200 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Rik van Riel Cc: "Stephen C. Tweedie" , Marcelo Tosatti , David Gould , "Eric W. Biederman" , lkml , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 02:45:04PM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote: > One solution could be to put (most of) the swapin readahead > pages on the inactive_dirty list, so pressure by readahead > on the resident pages is smaller and the not used readahead > pages are reclaimed faster. Shouldn't they be on inactive_clean anyway? They are not mapped (if I read Stephens comment correctly) and are clean (because we just read them in). So if we have to put it there explicitly, we have at least a performance bug, don't we? Or do I still not get the new linux mm design? ;-( Totally clueless Ingo Oeser PS: Who CC'ed is also subscribed to linux-mm? Or do we all filter dupes via "formail -D"? ;-) -- 10.+11.03.2001 - 3. Chemnitzer LinuxTag <<<<<<<<<<<< come and join the fun >>>>>>>>>>>> -- 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/