Re: Should PAGE_CACHE_SIZE be discarded?

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: David Howells <dhowells@...>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...>, <torvalds@...>, <linux-arch@...>, <linux-fsdevel@...>
Date: Thursday, November 15, 2007 - 10:15 am

On Nov. 15, 2007, 14:05 +0200, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:

I think that what Nick was trying to say is that PAGE_CACHE_SIZE should always
be used properly as the size of the memory struct Page covers (while PAGE_SIZE
is the hardware page size and the constraint is that PAGE_CACHE_SIZE == (PAGE_SIZE << k)
for some k >= 0).  If everybody does that then "None of the filesystems should really
care at all". That said, it doesn't seem like the current usage in fs/ and drivers/
is consistent with this convention.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Should PAGE_CACHE_SIZE be discarded?, David Howells, (Wed Nov 14, 9:56 am)
Re: Should PAGE_CACHE_SIZE be discarded?, Jörn, (Thu Nov 15, 1:09 pm)
Re: Should PAGE_CACHE_SIZE be discarded?, Nick Piggin, (Wed Nov 14, 11:23 am)
Re: Should PAGE_CACHE_SIZE be discarded?, David Howells, (Wed Nov 14, 11:59 am)
Re: Should PAGE_CACHE_SIZE be discarded?, Nick Piggin, (Wed Nov 14, 5:35 pm)
Re: Should PAGE_CACHE_SIZE be discarded?, David Howells, (Thu Nov 15, 8:05 am)
Re: Should PAGE_CACHE_SIZE be discarded?, Benny Halevy, (Thu Nov 15, 10:15 am)
Re: Should PAGE_CACHE_SIZE be discarded?, David Howells, (Thu Nov 15, 10:46 am)
Re: Should PAGE_CACHE_SIZE be discarded?, Nick Piggin, (Thu Nov 15, 5:30 pm)