Re: [PATCH -mm] mm: more likely reclaim MADV_SEQUENTIAL mappings

[Rik van Riel]

On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 15:49:00 +1000
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> It is already bad because: if you are doing a big streaming copy
> which you know is going to blow the cache and not be used again,
> then you should be unmapping behind you as you go.

MADV_SEQUENTIAL exists for a reason.

If you think that doing an automatic unmap-behind will be
a better way to go, we can certainly whip up a patch for
that...

-- 
All rights reversed.
--
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/