On Thursday 10 January 2008 02:45, David Howells wrote:
> Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It is to make everybody happy. Especially in code that everyone works
> > on like mm/ and fs/, you can't just have everybody following their own
> > slightly different conventions.
>
> Conventions
Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is to make everybody happy. Especially in code that everyone works
> on like mm/ and fs/, you can't just have everybody following their own
> slightly different conventions.
Conventions are what people agree they are.
Anyway, I've attached a revised
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is to make everybody happy. Especially in code that everyone works
on like mm/ and fs/, you can't just have everybody following their own
slightly different conventions.
Conventions are what people agree they are.
Anyway, I've attached a revised page
On Thursday 10 January 2008 02:45, David Howells wrote:
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is to make everybody happy. Especially in code that everyone works
on like mm/ and fs/, you can't just have everybody following their own
slightly different conventions.
Conventions are what
On Wednesday 09 January 2008 10:51, David Howells wrote:
> Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > No. I mean call the bit PG_private2. That way non-pagecache and
> > > > filesystems that don't use fscache can use it.
> > >
> > > The bit is
Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > No. I mean call the bit PG_private2. That way non-pagecache and
> > > filesystems that don't use fscache can use it.
> >
> > The bit is called PG_owner_priv_2, and then 'subclassed' to PG_fscache,
> > much
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No. I mean call the bit PG_private2. That way non-pagecache and
filesystems that don't use fscache can use it.
The bit is called PG_owner_priv_2, and then 'subclassed' to PG_fscache,
much like PG_owner_priv_1
On Wednesday 09 January 2008 10:51, David Howells wrote:
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No. I mean call the bit PG_private2. That way non-pagecache and
filesystems that don't use fscache can use it.
The bit is called PG_owner_priv_2, and
On Tuesday 08 January 2008 00:09, David Howells wrote:
> Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No. I mean call the bit PG_private2. That way non-pagecache and
> > filesystems that don't use fscache can use it.
>
> The bit is called PG_owner_priv_2, and then 'subclassed' to PG_fscache,
> much
Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No. I mean call the bit PG_private2. That way non-pagecache and
> filesystems that don't use fscache can use it.
The bit is called PG_owner_priv_2, and then 'subclassed' to PG_fscache, much
like PG_owner_priv_1 is 'subclassed' to PG_checked as was
On Thursday 03 January 2008 03:27, David Howells wrote:
> Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Then make a PG_private2 bit and use that.
>
> To what end? Are you suggesting I should have:
>
> PG_private2 = PG_private | PG_fscache
No. I mean call the bit PG_private2. That way
On Thursday 03 January 2008 03:27, David Howells wrote:
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then make a PG_private2 bit and use that.
To what end? Are you suggesting I should have:
PG_private2 = PG_private | PG_fscache
No. I mean call the bit PG_private2. That way non-pagecache and
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No. I mean call the bit PG_private2. That way non-pagecache and
filesystems that don't use fscache can use it.
The bit is called PG_owner_priv_2, and then 'subclassed' to PG_fscache, much
like PG_owner_priv_1 is 'subclassed' to PG_checked as was
On Tuesday 08 January 2008 00:09, David Howells wrote:
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No. I mean call the bit PG_private2. That way non-pagecache and
filesystems that don't use fscache can use it.
The bit is called PG_owner_priv_2, and then 'subclassed' to PG_fscache,
much like
Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Then make a PG_private2 bit and use that.
To what end? Are you suggesting I should have:
PG_private2 = PG_private | PG_fscache
That's redundant information and doesn't help anything really.
My suggestion (PG_private and PG_fscache separate and
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then make a PG_private2 bit and use that.
To what end? Are you suggesting I should have:
PG_private2 = PG_private | PG_fscache
That's redundant information and doesn't help anything really.
My suggestion (PG_private and PG_fscache separate and
On Friday 21 December 2007 05:33, David Howells wrote:
> Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > I'd much prefer if you would handle this in the filesystem, and have
> > > > it set PG_private whenever fscache needs to receive a callback, and
> > > > DTRT depending on whether PG_fscache etc.
Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I'd much prefer if you would handle this in the filesystem, and have it
> > > set PG_private whenever fscache needs to receive a callback, and DTRT
> > > depending on whether PG_fscache etc. is set or not.
> >
> > That's tricky and slower[*]. One of
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd much prefer if you would handle this in the filesystem, and have it
set PG_private whenever fscache needs to receive a callback, and DTRT
depending on whether PG_fscache etc. is set or not.
That's tricky and slower[*]. One of the things I
On Friday 21 December 2007 05:33, David Howells wrote:
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd much prefer if you would handle this in the filesystem, and have
it set PG_private whenever fscache needs to receive a callback, and
DTRT depending on whether PG_fscache etc. is set or not.
On Tuesday 18 December 2007 09:36, David Howells wrote:
> Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'd much prefer if you would handle this in the filesystem, and have it
> > set PG_private whenever fscache needs to receive a callback, and DTRT
> > depending on whether PG_fscache etc. is set or
Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd much prefer if you would handle this in the filesystem, and have it
> set PG_private whenever fscache needs to receive a callback, and DTRT
> depending on whether PG_fscache etc. is set or not.
That's tricky and slower[*]. One of the things I want to
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd much prefer if you would handle this in the filesystem, and have it
set PG_private whenever fscache needs to receive a callback, and DTRT
depending on whether PG_fscache etc. is set or not.
That's tricky and slower[*]. One of the things I want to do
On Tuesday 18 December 2007 09:36, David Howells wrote:
Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd much prefer if you would handle this in the filesystem, and have it
set PG_private whenever fscache needs to receive a callback, and DTRT
depending on whether PG_fscache etc. is set or not.
On Thursday 06 December 2007 06:39, David Howells wrote:
> Recruit a couple of page flags to aid in cache management. The following
> extra flags are defined:
>
> (1) PG_fscache (PG_owner_priv_2)
>
> The marked page is backed by a local cache and is pinning resources in
> the cache driver.
On Thursday 06 December 2007 06:39, David Howells wrote:
Recruit a couple of page flags to aid in cache management. The following
extra flags are defined:
(1) PG_fscache (PG_owner_priv_2)
The marked page is backed by a local cache and is pinning resources in
the cache driver.
(2)
Recruit a couple of page flags to aid in cache management. The following extra
flags are defined:
(1) PG_fscache (PG_owner_priv_2)
The marked page is backed by a local cache and is pinning resources in the
cache driver.
(2) PG_fscache_write (PG_owner_priv_3)
The marked page
Recruit a couple of page flags to aid in cache management. The following extra
flags are defined:
(1) PG_fscache (PG_owner_priv_2)
The marked page is backed by a local cache and is pinning resources in the
cache driver.
(2) PG_fscache_write (PG_owner_priv_3)
The marked page
28 matches
Mail list logo
