On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > By misunderstanding any suggestions, misrepresenting them, making incorrect > statements about them, by not suggesting any alternatives yourself, all of > it buttressed by a stolid refusal to recognise that this patch has any > costs.
That was even mentioned in the initial post.... Definitely it would require significant changes but getting there is fairly straightforward with the use of compound pages. > This effectively leaves it up to others to find time to think about and to > implement possible alternative solutions to the problems which you're > observing. They are working on other problems like radix tree scalability it seems. > The altenative which is on the table (and there may be others) is > populating pagecache with physically contiguous pages. This will fix the > HBA problem and is much less costly in terms of maintenance and will > improve all workloads on all machines and doesn't have the additional > runtime costs of pagecache wastage and more memset() overhead with small > files and it doesn't require administrator intervention. > > OTOH (yes! there are tradeoffs!) it will consume an unknown amount more > CPU and it doesn't address the large-fs-blocksize requirement, but I don't > know how important the latter is and given the unrelenting advocacy storm > coming from the SGI direction I don't know how to find that out, frankly. This is certainly a nice approach if it works and may address one issue that motivated this patchset but it does not address all. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
