[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 16:01:50 +0000 (GMT)
From: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Fix LSF default inconsistency
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> >> Me neither, lets ask the originator of the patch. Rik, why is
> >> unevictable lru an option?
> >
> > I think we had some reasons to keep it as a separate config
> > option during development, but nowadays we might as well
> > put it all just under CONFIG_SWAP...
>
> I'm sad ;)
>
> To move mlocked file cache page to unevictable list is useful although
> swapless embedded device.
Yes, I don't understand why Rik suggested CONFIG_SWAP for it either.
>
> Actually, number of scanning pages of reclaim is calculated by number
> of pages in list.
> if unevictable page stay in evictable list a lot, reclaim logic can
> calculate wrong scanning number.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists