From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <48FDE9E9.5020805@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:40:41 -0400 From: Rik van Riel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [rfc] mm: more likely reclaim MADV_SEQUENTIAL mappings References: <87d4hugrwm.fsf@saeurebad.de> In-Reply-To: <87d4hugrwm.fsf@saeurebad.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Johannes Weiner Cc: Nick Piggin , Andrew Morton , KOSAKI Motohiro , Linux MM Mailing List List-ID: Johannes Weiner wrote: > I'm afraid this is now quite a bit more aggressive than the earlier > version. When the fault path did a mark_page_access(), we wouldn't > reclaim a page when it has been faulted into several MADV_SEQUENTIAL > mappings but now we ignore *every* activity through such a mapping. > > What do you think? > > Perhaps we should note a reference if there are two or more accesses > through sequentially read mappings? That can be easily accomplished by dropping the memory.c part of your patch. I do not know whether that would work any better than the patch you just posted, though :) -- All rights reversed. -- 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