Messages in this thread | | | From | "Stephen C. Tweedie" <> | Date | Mon, 28 Jun 1999 15:15:42 +0100 (BST) | Subject | Re: I think I have a memory leak in 2.3.x |
| |
Hi,
On Thu, 24 Jun 1999 11:09:42 -0400 (EDT), Chuck Lever <cel@monkey.org> said:
> since i don't have the history that you and others here might have, can > you tell me why the inode cache is implemented so that it uses raw pages > and never shrinks? is it simply older than the slab cache > implementation?
The original inode cache is ancient. The slab only arrived in 2.1. The inode.c was pretty much rewritten in 2.1 too, but the underlying data structures predate slab by a long, long way.
> would there be any advantage to a re-implementation?
Potentially.
--Stephen
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |