[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49FB5623.3030403@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 16:05:55 -0400
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: elladan@...imo.com, peterz@...radead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tytso@....edu,
kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmscan: evict use-once pages first (v2)
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 01 May 2009 10:05:53 -0400
> Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> wrote:
>> This means we need to provide our working set protection
>> on a per-list basis, by tweaking the scan rate or avoiding
>> scanning of the active file list alltogether under certain
>> conditions.
>>
>> As a side effect, this will help protect frequently accessed
>> file pages (good for ftp and nfs servers), indirect blocks,
>> inode buffers and other frequently used metadata.
>
> Yeah, but that's all internal-implementation-of-the-day details. It
> just doesn't matter how the sausages are made. What we have learned is
> that the policy of retaining mapped pages over unmapped pages, *all
> other things being equal* leads to a more pleasing system.
Well, retaining mapped pages is one of the implementations
that lead to a more pleasing system.
I suspect that a fully scan resistant active file list will
show the same behaviour, as well as a few other desired
behaviours that come in very handy in various server loads.
Are you open to evaluating other methods that could lead, on
desktop systems, to a behaviour similar to the one achieved
by the preserve-mapped-pages mechanism?
--
All rights reversed.
--
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