On 2/15/12 4:56 PM, Andrea Righi wrote:
Oh sorry, you're right! nocache_tree is not a pointer inside address_space, so the compiler must know the size. mmh... move the definition of the rb_root struct in linux/types.h? or simply use a rb_root pointer. The (void *) looks a bit scary and too bug prone.
Either way is fine. I did some black box testing of the patch (comparing noreuse vs dontneed) and it behaves as expected.
On a file copy, neither one pollutes the page cache. But if I run a random read benchmark on the source file right before and afterwards, page cache is warm with noreuse, but cold with dontneed. Copy performance was unaffected.
I can't really comment on the implementation details since I haven't reviewed it, but the functionality sounds useful.
-Arun -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>