Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] fadvise: implement POSIX_FADV_NOREUSE

[Arun Sharma]

On 2/15/12 4:56 PM, Andrea Righi wrote:

> Oh sorry, you're right! nocache_tree is not a pointer inside
> address_space, so the compiler must know the size.
>
> mmh... move the definition of the rb_root struct in linux/types.h? or
> simply use a rb_root pointer. The (void *) looks a bit scary and too bug
> prone.

Either way is fine. I did some black box testing of the patch (comparing 
noreuse vs dontneed) and it behaves as expected.

On a file copy, neither one pollutes the page cache. But if I run a 
random read benchmark on the source file right before and afterwards, 
page cache is warm with noreuse, but cold with dontneed. Copy 
performance was unaffected.

I can't really comment on the implementation details since I haven't 
reviewed it, but the functionality sounds useful.

 -Arun

--
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/