linux-kernel - Re: [patch 10/21] buffer heads: Support slab defrag

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 21 May 2008 02:25:05 +0400
From:	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
To:	David Chinner <dgc@....com>
Cc:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Mel Gorman <mel@...net.ie>, andi@...stfloor.org,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, mpm@...enic.com
Subject: Re: [patch 10/21] buffer heads: Support slab defrag

On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 07:46:17AM +1000, David Chinner (dgc@....com) wrote:
> Oh, god no. Let's not put the inode_lock right at the top of
> the VM page cleaning path. We don't need to modify inode state,
> the superblock dirty lists, etc - all we need to do is write
> dirty pages on a given mapping in a more efficient manner.

I'm not advocating that, but having swap on reclaim does not hurt
anyone, this is essentially the same, but with different underlying
storage. System will do that anyway sooner or later during usual
writeback, which in turn can be a result of the same reclaim...

-- 
	Evgeniy Polyakov
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/