Hi Hugh!
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 12:55:02PM +0000, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Nov 2005, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >
> > Pages which hit the first time in cache due to readahead _have_ caused
> > IO, and as such they should be counted as major faults.
>
> Have caused IO, or have benefitted from IO which was done earlier?
Which caused IO, either synchronously or via (previously read)
readahead.
> It sounds debatable, each will have their own idea of what's major.
I see your point... and I much prefer the "majflt means IO performed"
definition :)
As a user I want to know how many pages have been read in from disk to
service my application requests.
>From the "time" manpage:
F Number of major, or I/O-requiring, page faults that oc-
curred while the process was running. These are faults
where the page has actually migrated out of primary memo-
ry.
> Maybe PageUptodate at the time the entry is found in the page cache
> should come into it? !PageUptodate implying that we'll be waiting
> for read to complete.
Hum, I still strongly feel that users care about IO performed and not
readahead effectiveness (which could be separate information).
I don't think the semantics are precisely defined anywhere are they?
-
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]
