From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 15:58:59 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Subtle MM bug In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Marcelo Tosatti Cc: "Stephen C. Tweedie" , "David S. Miller" , Rik van Riel , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > > > The second problem is that background scanning is being done > > > unconditionally, and it should not. You end up getting all pages with the > > > same age if the system is idle. Look at this example (2.4.1-pre1): > > > > I agree. However, I think that we do want to do some background scanning > > to push out dirty pages in the background, kind of like bdflush. It just > > shouldn't age the pages (and thus not move them to the inactive list). > > Actually it must age the pages, but aging should not be unconditional. No, I'm saying that "the background scanning" should not do the page aging. Obviously "refill_inactive()" needs to do the page aging. I'm just not at all convinced that "background scanning" == "refill_inactive()". Linus -- 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.eu.org/Linux-MM/