From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:26:17 -0300 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: [patch] vmfixes-2.4.0-test9-B2 - fixing deadlocks In-Reply-To: <20000925213242.A30832@athlon.random> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: "Stephen C. Tweedie" , Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds , Roger Larsson , MM mailing list , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 25 Sep 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 07:06:57PM +0100, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote: > > Good. One of the problems we always had in the past, though, was that > > getting the relative aging of cache vs. vmas was easy if you had a > > small set of test loads, but it was really, really hard to find a > > balance that didn't show pathological behaviour in the worst cases. > > Yep, that's not trivial. It is. Just do physical-page based aging (so you age all the pages in the system the same) and the problem is solved. > > > I may be overlooking something but where do you notice when a page > > > gets unmapped from the last mapping and put it back into a place > > > that can be reached from shrink_mmap (or whatever the cache recycler is)? > > > > It doesn't --- that is part of the design. The vm scanner propagates > > And that's the inferior part of the design IMHO. Indeed, but physical page based aging is a definate 2.5 thing ... ;( regards, Rik -- "What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!" -- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000 http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.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.eu.org/Linux-MM/