Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 4 Aug 2002 15:02:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 4 Aug 2002 15:02:19 -0400 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:22800 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 4 Aug 2002 15:02:19 -0400 Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2002 12:05:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Rik van Riel cc: Hans Reiser , Andreas Gruenbacher , Alan Cox , Marcelo Tosatti , lkml Subject: Re: [PATCH] Caches that shrink automatically In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1069 Lines: 29 On Sun, 4 Aug 2002, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > In particular, it is useless for the sub-caches to try to maintain their > > own LRU lists and their own accessed bits. But that doesn't mean that > > they can _act_ as if they updated their own accessed bits, while really > > just telling the page-based thing that that page is active. > > I'm not sure I agree with this. For eg. the dcache you will want > to reclaim the less used entries on a page even if there are a few > very intensely used entries on that page. True in theory, but I doubt you will see it very much in practice. Most of the time when you want to free dentries, it is because you have a _ton_ of them. The fact that some will look cold even if they aren't should not matter that much statistically. Yah, it's a guess. We can test it. Linus - 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/