From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 14:05:46 +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: <20001003012546.C27493@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: Rik van Riel , Linus Torvalds , MM mailing list , "Stephen C. Tweedie" List-ID: On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > 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, > > I'm pretty sure it doesn't worth the per-bh thing. And even if it > would make any difference with a 1k fs for good performance 4k blksize > is necessary anyway for other reasons. well if those bhs are aged by the normal buffer-cache aging mechanizm, then there is no choice but to age them at bh granularity, not page granularity. (this is only interesting in the case of 1k filesystems.) Aging page->buffers at bh granularity creates interesting situations. 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/