From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 12:35:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 12:35:17 -0400 Received: from garrincha.netbank.com.br ([200.203.199.88]:6665 "HELO netbank.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 12:35:06 -0400 Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 13:34:54 -0300 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel To: Colonel Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: What are the VM motivations?? In-Reply-To: <20010624161502.4D75C784C4@mail.clouddancer.com> Message-ID: X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Colonel wrote: > It's simple. I want the old reliable behavior back, the one I found > in kernels from 1.1.41 thru 2.2.14. And which one would that be ? Note that there have been 4 different VM subsystems in that time and the kernel has made the transition from the buffer cache to the page cache in that period. Please make up your mind before making feature requests ;) regards, Rik -- Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose... http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ Send all your spam to aardvark@nl.linux.org (spam digging piggy)