From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 01:29:27 +0200 (CEST) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: mingo@elte.hu 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: Rik van Riel Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrea Arcangeli , MM mailing list , "Stephen C. Tweedie" List-ID: On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > > another thing is the complexity of marking a page dirty - right > > > > now we can assume that page->buffers holds all the blocks. With > > > > aging we must check wether a bh is there or not, > > > > > > The code must already be able to handle this. This is nothing new. > > > > sure this is new. The page->buffers list right now is assumed to > > stay constant after being created. > > Eeeeeek. So pages /cannot/ lose their buffer heads ??? it can and does lose them - but only all of them. Aging OTOH is a per-bh thing, this kind of granularity is simply not present in the current page->buffers handling. This is all i wanted to mention. Not unsolvable, but needs extra logic. Ingo -- 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/