Re: Possible Idea with filesystem buffering.

From: Hans Reiser (reiser@namesys.com)
Date: Tue Jan 22 2002 - 13:46:07 EST


Rik van Riel wrote:

>On Tue, 22 Jan 2002, Chris Mason wrote:
>
>>It seems like the basic features we are suggesting are very close, I'll try
>>one last time to make a case against the 'free_some_pages' call ;-)
>>
>
>>The FS doesn't know how long a page has been dirty, or how often it
>>gets used,
>>
>
>In an efficient system, the FS will never get to know this, either.
>

I don't understand this statement. If dereferencing a vfs op for every
page aging is too expensive, then ask it to age more than one page at a
time. Or do I miss your meaning?

>
>
>The whole idea behind the VFS and the VM is that calls to the FS
>are avoided as much as possible, in order to keep the system fast.
>
In other words, you write the core of our filesystem for us, and we
write the parts that don't interest you?

Maybe this is the real meat of the issue?

Hans

-
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 : Wed Jan 23 2002 - 21:00:55 EST