Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:38:05 -0800 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call |
| |
On Tue, 25 Feb 2003, William Lee Irwin III wrote: >> My impression thus far is that the anonymous case has not been pressing >> with respect to space consumption or cpu time once the file-backed code >> is in place, though if it resurfaces as a serious concern the anonymous >> rework can be pursued (along with other things).
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 02:24:18AM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote: > ... but making the anonymous pages use an object based > scheme probably will make things too expensive. > IIRC the object based reverse map patches by bcrl and > davem both failed on the complexities needed to deal > with anonymous pages. > My instinct is that a hybrid system will work well in > most cases and the worst case with mapped files won't > be too bad.
The boxen I'm supposed to babysit need a high degree of resource consciousness wrt. lowmem allocations, so there is a clear voice on this issue. IMHO it's still an open question as to whether this is efficient for replacement concerns, which may yet favor objects.
-- wli - 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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |