Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23

[Ingo Molnar]

* Rene Herman <rene.herman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > and the fact is: updatedb discards a considerable portion of the 
> > cache completely unnecessarily: on a reasonably complex box no way 
> > do all the inodes and dentries fit into all of RAM, so we just trash 
> > everything.
> 
> Okay, but unless I've now managed to really quite horribly confuse 
> myself, that wouldn't have anything to do with _swap_ prefetch would 
> it?

it's connected: it would remove updatedb from the VM picture altogether. 
(updatedb would just cycle through the files with leaving minimal cache 
disturbance.)

hence swap-prefetch could concentrate on the cases where it makes sense 
to start swap prefetching _without_ destroying other, already cached 
content: such as when a large app exits and frees gobs of memory back 
into the buddy allocator. _That_ would be a definitive "no costs and 
side-effects" point for swap-prefetch to kick in, and it would eliminate 
this pretty artificial (and unnecessary) 'desktop versus server' 
controversy and would turn it into a 'helps everyone' feature.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/