On Sat, 19 May 2007 20:30:31 +0800 Fengguang Wu <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 11:28:24PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 May 2007 06:47:53 +0800 Fengguang Wu <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Introduce a new page flag: PG_readahead.
> >
> > Is there any way in which we can avoid adding a new page flag?
> >
> > We have the advantage that if the kernel very occasionally gets the wrong
> > result for PageReadahead(page), nothing particularly bad will happen, so we
> > can do racy things.
> >
> > >From a quick peek, it appears that PG_readahead is only ever set against
> > non-uptodate pages. If true we could perhaps exploit that: say,
> > PageReadahead(page) == PG_referenced && !PG_uptodate?
>
> PG_uptodate will flip to 1 before the reader touches the page :(
OK.
> However, it may be possible to share the same bit with PG_reclaim or PG_booked.
> Which one would be preferred?
I'd like PG_booked to go away too - I don't think we've put that under the
microscope yet. If it remains then its scope will be "defined by the
filesystem", so readahead shouldn't use it. PG_reclaim belongs to core VFS
so that's much better.
Let's not do anything ugly, slow or silly in there, but please do take a
look, see if there is an opportunity here.
-
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]