On Tue, 28 June 2005 16:05:11 -0400, Robert Love wrote:
>
> I like the idea (I think someone suggested this early on) of renaming
> the current MADV_DONTNEED to MADV_FREE and then adding a correct
> MADV_DONTNEED.
Imo, that's still a crime against common sense. Madvice should give
the kernel some advice about which data to keep or not to keep in
memory, hence the name. It should *not* tell the kernel to corrupt
data, which currently appears to be the case.
If the application knows 100% that it is the _only_ possible user of
this data and will never again use it, dropping dirty pages might be a
sane option. Effectively that translates to anonymous memory only.
In all other cases, dirty pages should be written back.
> And, as I said, the man page needs clarification.
Definitely.
Jörn
--
Eighty percent of success is showing up.
-- Woody Allen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
