On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 14:26 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > On Wednesday 31 October 2007 03:04, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Another posting of the full swap over NFS series. > > Hi, > > Is it really worth all the added complexity of making swap > over NFS files work, given that you could use a network block > device instead? As it stands, we don't have a usable network block device IMHO. NFS is by far the most used and usable network storage solution out there, anybody with half a brain knows how to set it up and use it. > Also, have you ensured that page_file_index, page_file_mapping > and page_offset are only ever used on anonymous pages when the > page is locked? (otherwise PageSwapCache could change) Good point, I hope so, both ->readpage() and ->writepage() take a locked page, I'd have to look if it remains locked throughout the NFS call chain. Then again, it might become obsolete with the extended swap a_ops.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 00/33] Swap over NFS -v14
- From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 00/33] Swap over NFS -v14
- References:
- [PATCH 00/33] Swap over NFS -v14
- From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 00/33] Swap over NFS -v14
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 00/33] Swap over NFS -v14
- Prev by Date: Re: NBD was Re: [PATCH 00/33] Swap over NFS -v14
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] hiddev: compat_ptr() returns a void *
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 00/33] Swap over NFS -v14
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 00/33] Swap over NFS -v14
- Index(es):
 |