How do you ensure that caches have their (internal) aging hands pushed
at a speed that is proportional to their memory usage, or is your design
susceptible to all the usual complaints the unified memory manager crowd
has about separate caches?
Hans
Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
>Hello,
>
>Currently there is no way for modules to define dynamically sized caches that
>shrink upon memory pressure. We need this for implementing Extended Attribute
>caches on ext2, ext3, and ReiserFS. Other caches could also make use of the
>same mechanism (e.g., nfsd's permission cache, dcache, icache, dqache).
>
>I propose this patch, which adds the register_cache() and unregister_cache()
>functions. They allow to register a callback which is invoked on memory
>pressure. This callback shall then try to free some memory; the parameters
>and semantics are similar to the other shrink functions in mm/vmscan.c.
>
>
>Regards,
>Andreas.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
> Andreas Gruenbacher SuSE Linux AG
> mailto:agruen@suse.de Deutschherrnstr. 15-19
> http://www.suse.de/ D-90429 Nuernberg, Germany
>
>
>
>
-- 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 Aug 07 2002 - 22:00:24 EST