Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757550Ab0KOOs6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:48:58 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:28531 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756998Ab0KOOs5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:48:57 -0500 Message-ID: <4CE14848.2060805@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:48:40 -0500 From: Rik van Riel User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100806 Fedora/3.1.2-1.fc13 Lightning/1.0b2pre Thunderbird/3.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Minchan Kim CC: Peter Zijlstra , KOSAKI Motohiro , Ben Gamari , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rsync@lists.samba.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Wu Fengguang Subject: Re: fadvise DONTNEED implementation (or lack thereof) References: <20101109162525.BC87.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <877hgmr72o.fsf@gmail.com> <20101114140920.E013.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <1289810825.2109.469.camel@laptop> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1575 Lines: 41 On 11/15/2010 04:05 AM, Minchan Kim wrote: > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 15:07 +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: >>> I wonder what's the problem in Peter's patch 'drop behind'. >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg179576.html >>> >>> Could anyone tell me why it can't accept upstream? >> >> Read the thread, its quite clear nobody got convinced it was a good idea >> and wanted to fix the use-once policy, then Rik rewrote all of >> page-reclaim. >> > > Thanks for the information. > I hope this is a chance to rethink about it. > Rik, Could you give us to any comment about this idea? At the time, there were all kinds of general problems in page reclaim that all needed to be fixed. Peter's patch was mostly a band-aid for streaming IO. However, now that most of the other page reclaim problems seem to have been resolved, it would be worthwhile to test whether Peter's drop-behind approach gives an additional improvement. I could see it help by getting rid of already-read pages earlier, leaving more space for read-ahead data. I suspect it would do fairly little to protect the working set, because we do not scan the active file list at all unless it grows to be larger than the inactive file list. -- All rights reversed -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/