From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 333F68D0017 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 02:19:52 -0500 (EST) Received: by gwj16 with SMTP id 16so2695357gwj.14 for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2010 23:19:49 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20101115160413.BF0F.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20101114140920.E013.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20101115160413.BF0F.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 16:19:48 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: fadvise DONTNEED implementation (or lack thereof) From: Minchan Kim Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: Ben Gamari , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rsync@lists.samba.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Peter Zijlstra , Wu Fengguang List-ID: On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 4:09 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: >> > Because we have an alternative solution already. please try memcgroup :) >> >> I think memcg could be a solution of them but fundamental solution is >> that we have to cure it in VM itself. >> I feel it's absolutely absurd to enable and use memcg for amending it. >> >> I wonder what's the problem in Peter's patch 'drop behind'. >> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg179576.html >> >> Could anyone tell me why it can't accept upstream? > > I don't know the reason. And this one looks reasonable to me. I'm curious the above > patch solve rsync issue or not. > Minchan, have you tested it yourself? Still yet. :) If we all think it's reasonable, it would be valuable to adjust it with current mmotm and see the effect. > > > -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org