Re: 2.6.xx: dirty pages never being sync'd to disk?

Mark Lord wrote:

Another intriguing observation:

If I do my file copy test from files that are already cached,
then the data usually gets committed to disk more or less
right away.

And even in that case, /proc/meminfo still shows the memory
as "Dirty", until a "sync" is done.  Why is that?
-
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/

---

• References:
  • 2.6.xx: dirty pages never being sync'd to disk?
    • From: Mark Lord <[email protected]>
  • Re: 2.6.xx: dirty pages never being sync'd to disk?
    • From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
  • Re: 2.6.xx: dirty pages never being sync'd to disk?
    • From: Mark Lord <[email protected]>
  • Re: 2.6.xx: dirty pages never being sync'd to disk?
    • From: Badari Pulavarty <[email protected]>
  • Re: 2.6.xx: dirty pages never being sync'd to disk?
    • From: Mark Lord <[email protected]>
  • Re: 2.6.xx: dirty pages never being sync'd to disk?
    • From: Mark Lord <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] Make usbdevice_fs.h (again) useable from userspace
• Next by Date: Re: [2.6 patch] i386: always use 4k stacks
• Previous by thread: Re: 2.6.xx: dirty pages never being sync'd to disk?
• Next by thread: 2.6.15-rc1 fails to boot on eMac
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]