Re: [PATCH] block: Fix LSF default inconsistency

[Rik van Riel]

Hugh Dickins wrote:

> Sorry, I'm still puzzled: I thought the unevictable lru was for
> shared file pages as well as for anon pages?  Of course I agree
> with you over the anons (and shm and tmpfs get counted along
> with the anons in this context), but wouldn't we still need
> an unevictable lru for mlocked shared file pages?

Good point, you are correct.  I had forgotten about that
part completely - keeping CONFIG_UNEVICTABLE_LRU may be
a good idea after all.

--
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/