From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: [RFC] My research agenda for 2.7 Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 17:47:58 -0700 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20030625004758.GO26348@holomorphy.com> References: <200306250111.01498.phillips@arcor.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200306250111.01498.phillips@arcor.de> To: Daniel Phillips Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-mm.kvack.org On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:11:01AM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > - Page size is represented on a per-address space basis with a shift count. > In practice, the smallest is 9 (512 byte sector), could imagine 7 (each > ext2 inode is separate page) or 8 (actual hardsect size on some drives). > 12 will be the most common size. 13 gives 8K blocksize for, e.g., alpha. > 21 and 22 give 2M and 4M page size, matching hardware capabilities of > x86, and other sizes are possible on machines like MIPS, where page size > is software controllable > - Implemented only for file-backed memory (page cache) Per struct address_space? This is an unnecessary limitation. On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 01:11:01AM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > - Special case these ops in page cache access layer instead of having the > messy code in the block IO library > - Subpage struct pages are dynamically allocated. But buffer_heads are gone > so this is a lateral change. This gives me the same data structure proliferation chills as bh's. -- wli