Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 03 Sep 2021 17:10:31 +1000
From:   Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Is it possible to implement the per-node page cache for
 programs/libraries?
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc:     akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org,
        Shijie Huang <shijie@amperemail.onmicrosoft.com>,
        song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, Frank Wang <zwang@amperecomputing.com>
References: <a2f423cf-9413-6bc8-e4d8-92374fc0449e@amperemail.onmicrosoft.com>
        <YS7yjcqA6txFHd99@casper.infradead.org>
        <1630552995.2mupnzoqzs.astroid@bobo.none>
        <YTCktV3KF9PzIACU@casper.infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <YTCktV3KF9PzIACU@casper.infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <1630652670.aplcvu6g23.astroid@bobo.none>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Excerpts from Matthew Wilcox's message of September 2, 2021 8:17 pm:
> On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 01:25:36PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>> > I have been thinking about this a bit; one of our internal performance
>> > teams flagged the potential performance win to me a few months ago.
>> > I don't have a concrete design for text replication yet; there have be=
en
>> > various attempts over the years, but none were particularly compelling=
.
>>=20
>> What was not compelling about it?
>=20
> It wasn't merged, so clearly it wasn't compelling enough?

Ha ha. It sounded like you had some reasons you didn't find it=20
particularly compelling :P

>=20
>> https://lists.openwall.net/linux-kernel/2007/07/27/112
>>=20
>> What are the other attempts?
>=20
> I found one from Dave Hansen in 2003:
>=20
> https://lwn.net/Articles/45082/
>=20

Huh interesting. I'd be surprised if I didn't see it go by at the time.

Thanks,
Nick