From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 13:46:02 -0400 (EDT) From: "Benjamin C.R. LaHaise" Subject: Re: process selection In-Reply-To: <199906141717.KAA31065@google.engr.sgi.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Kanoj Sarcar Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Sometime earlier, Rik wrote: > > Could it be an idea to take the 'sleeping time' of each > > process into account when selecting which process to swap > > out? Due to extreme lack of free time, I'm asking what > > you folks think of it before testing it myself... On Mon, 14 Jun 1999, Kanoj Sarcar wrote: > You are right, sleep time is a good heuristic to determine > the "swappability" of a process. I'm starting to think that going back and benchmarking my vm patches against 2.1.47 or 66 might prove useful as they used a physical page scanning with the old LFU technique, but proved remarkably faster than scanning the virtual addresses space of processes. Gee, I guess it's time for forward port the beast again and see what results it gets against current things. -ben (who now has another project for tonight) -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm my@address' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://humbolt.geo.uu.nl/Linux-MM/