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)
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 07 2001 - 21:00:34 EST