From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <43EAD524.6020105@yahoo.com.au> Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 16:37:40 +1100 From: Nick Piggin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC] Removing page->flags References: <1139381183.22509.186.camel@localhost> <43E9DBE8.8020900@yahoo.com.au> <43EAC2CE.2010108@yahoo.com.au> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Magnus Damm Cc: Magnus Damm , linux-mm@kvack.org, Magnus Damm List-ID: Magnus Damm wrote: > But introducing a second page->flags is out of the question, and > breaking out flags and placing a pointer to them in the node data > structure will introduce more cache misses. So it is probably not > worth it. > Yep. Even then, you can't simply have a single non-atomic flags word, unless _all_ flags are protected by the same lock. >> >>It seems pretty unlikely that we'll get a pluggable replacement >>policy in mainline any time soon though. > > > So, do you think it is more likely that a ClockPro implementation will > be accepted then? Or is Linux "doomed" to LRU forever? > I think (hope) that Linux eventually (if slowly) moves toward the best implementation available. I just don't think there will be sufficient justification for a pluggable page reclaim infrastructure in the mainline kernel. Cheers, Nick -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.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-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org