From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 17:45:25 -0300 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: [highmem bug report against -test5 and -test6] Re: [PATCH] Re: simple FS application that hangs 2.4-test5, mem mgmt problem or FS buffer cache mgmt problem? (fwd) 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: Ingo Molnar Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrea Arcangeli , linux-mm@kvack.org, "Stephen C. Tweedie" List-ID: On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Ingo Molnar wrote: > On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > I agree. Most of the time, there's absolutely no point in keeping the > > buffer heads around. Most pages (and _especially_ the actively mapped > > ones) do not need the buffer heads at all after creation - once they > > are uptodate they stay uptodate and we're only interested in the page, > > not the buffers used to create it. > > except for writes, there we cache the block # in the bh and do > not have to call the lowlevel FS repeatedly to calculate the FS > position of the page. Would it be "close enough" to simply clear the buffer heads of clean pages which make it to the front of the active list ? Or is there another optimisation we could do to make the approximation even better ? 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/