[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FD13C30.2030401@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 16:41:36 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>
CC: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
Robert Love <rlove@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
Andrea Righi <andrea@...terlinux.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Taras Glek <tgek@...illa.com>, Mike Hommey <mh@...ndium.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] [RFC] tmpfs: Add FALLOC_FL_MARK_VOLATILE/UNMARK_VOLATILE
handlers
On 06/07/2012 03:55 AM, Dmitry Adamushko wrote:
> but maybe we should also purge them before we swap out some non-tmpfs
> pages or drop some file-backed pages?
Sure... I guess we could kick that from either direct reclaim or from
kswapd. But, then we're basically back to the places where
shrink_slab() is called.
I think that means that we think it's preferable to integrate this more
directly in the VM instead of sticking it off in the corner of tmpfs
only, or pretending it's a slab.
Dunno... The slab shrinker one isn't looking _so_ bad at the moment.
--
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