From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 17:55:02 -0300 (BRT) From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: Broad questions about the current design In-Reply-To: <147C8BD2-AE1D-11D6-8D07-000393829FA4@cs.amherst.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Scott Kaplan Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Scott Kaplan wrote: > I want a simpler, non-scanning structure. I want the CLOCK/LRU SEGQ > structure that I described. So I'll just go ahead and do that, as it will > be the basis of some other experiments that I'm trying to do. Once (if?) > I've managed that, we can try some workloads to see what the overhead of > scanning is vs. the overhead of minor (non-I/O) page faults for the > inactive list references. My prediction for the outcome is as follows: > Anyone think this is interesting? Absolutely. One thing to keep in mind though is streaming IO and things like 'find' that touch a LOT of pages once. We probably want some kind of mechanism to prevent these streaming IO pages to flush out the whole working set at once. kind regards, Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.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-mm.org/