From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 07:21:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 07:21:28 -0400 Received: from garrincha.netbank.com.br ([200.203.199.88]:17169 "HELO netbank.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 07:21:13 -0400 Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 08:21:24 -0300 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: To: Jan Harkes Cc: Subject: Re: page_launder() on 2.4.9/10 issue In-Reply-To: <20010904164306.A1387@cs.cmu.edu> 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 Tue, 4 Sep 2001, Jan Harkes wrote: > The pte_chain allocation stuff looks a bit scary, where did you want > to reclaim them from when memory runs out, unmap existing pte's? Exactly. This is the strategy also used by BSD and it seems to work really well. > One thing that might be nice, and showed a lot of promise here is to > either age down by subtracting instead of dividing to make it less > aggressive. It is already hard enough for pages to get referenced > enough to move up the scale. Oh definately, I've tried it with linear page aging and it works a lot better. I'm just not including that in my patch right now because I don't want to mix policy and mechanism right now and I want to really get the mechanism right before moving on to other stuff. > Or use a similar approach as I have in my patch, age up periodically, > but only age down when there is memory shortage, Where can I get your patch ? regards, Rik -- IA64: a worthy successor to i860. http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ Send all your spam to aardvark@nl.linux.org (spam digging piggy)