For something like DB work, would this patch be *too* aggressive on
freeing memory/cache as to introduced increased latency there?
Just curious, I'm all for using *any* good VM changes.
On Thu, 2002-06-27 at 15:14, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> some fix for 2.4.19rc1 (btw, the lru_cache_del() in the LRU path is
> needed in 2.5 too and it's also more efficient than the
> page_cache_release, see ptrace freeing the anon pages with put_page(),
> it will not pass through page_cache_release and it will trigger the
> PageLRU check that __free_pages_ok isn't capable to handle in 2.5, I
> will make a full vm update for 2.5 [in small pieces based on post-Andrew
> split of the monolithic patch] in the next days anyways):
-- Austin Gonyou <austin@digitalroadkill.net> - 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 : Sun Jun 30 2002 - 22:00:13 EST