Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Do not call ->writepage[s] from direct reclaim and use a_ops->writepages() where possible

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:57:49PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:

Ok, I was under the mistaken impression that filesystems wanted to be
given ranges of pages where possible. Considering that there has been no
reaction to the patch in question from the filesystem people cc'd, I'll
drop the problem for now.


Yep. I've started a new series of tests that capture the trace points
during each test to get some data on how many dirty pages are really
being written back. They takes a long time to complete unfortunately.


Ok, I'll work out exactly how many dirty pages are being  written back
then. The data I have at the moment covers the whole test, so I cannot
be certain if all the writeback happened during one stress test or
whether it's a comment event.


-- 
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student                          Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick                         IBM Dublin Software Lab
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Do not call ->writepage[s] from direct ..., Mel Gorman, (Fri Jun 11, 5:33 am)
Re: [PATCH 6/6] vmscan: Do not writeback pages in direct r ..., Christoph Hellwig, (Fri Jun 11, 9:25 am)
Re: [PATCH 5/6] vmscan: Write out ranges of pages contiguo ..., Christoph Hellwig, (Fri Jun 11, 9:27 am)
Re: [PATCH 6/6] vmscan: Do not writeback pages in direct r ..., Christoph Hellwig, (Fri Jun 11, 10:49 am)