Cc: Jörn <joern@...>, Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...>, Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...>, Christoph Lameter <clameter@...>, <linux-fsdevel@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...>, Mel Gorman <mel@...>, William Lee Irwin III <wli@...>, David Chinner <dgc@...>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...>, Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...>, Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...>, Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...>, swin wang <wangswin@...>, <totty.lu@...>, <hugh@...>
On Sun, 16 September 2007 11:44:09 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
There may be another approach. We could create a never-pinned cache,
without trying hard to keep it full. Instead of moving a hot dentry at
dput() time, we move a cold one from the end of lru. And if the lru
list is short, we just chicken out.
Our definition of "short lru list" can either be based on a ratio of
pinned to unpinned dentries or on a metric of cache hits vs. cache
misses. I tend to dislike the cache hit metric, because updatedb would
cause tons of misses and result in the same mess we have right now.
With this double cache, we have a source of slabs to cheaply reap under
memory pressure, but still have a performance advantage (memcpy beats
disk io by orders of magnitude).
Jörn
--
The story so far:
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot
of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-- Douglas Adams
-
