On Tue, 25 Feb 2003, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> My impression thus far is that the anonymous case has not been pressing
>> with respect to space consumption or cpu time once the file-backed code
>> is in place, though if it resurfaces as a serious concern the anonymous
>> rework can be pursued (along with other things).
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 02:24:18AM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> ... but making the anonymous pages use an object based
> scheme probably will make things too expensive.
> IIRC the object based reverse map patches by bcrl and
> davem both failed on the complexities needed to deal
> with anonymous pages.
> My instinct is that a hybrid system will work well in
> most cases and the worst case with mapped files won't
> be too bad.
The boxen I'm supposed to babysit need a high degree of resource
consciousness wrt. lowmem allocations, so there is a clear voice
on this issue. IMHO it's still an open question as to whether this
is efficient for replacement concerns, which may yet favor objects.
-- wli
-
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 Feb 28 2003 - 22:00:34 EST