El Sat, 28 Jul 2007 02:03:19 +0200 (CEST), "Indan Zupancic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> Perhaps one of the reasons is that this is core kernel code. And that it > isn't a new > feature, but a performance improvement with doubtful trade-offs. The problem > statement isn't clear either. It seems like a natural enhancement, but is > that enough > reason to merge it? Maybe, maybe not. But if slow swap-in is the problem, > shouldn't > that be fixed instead of bypassed? The problem AFAIK it's clear: Swap in is slow by nature because it's random. Well, it "looks" like it should be random. Now that would be a interesting thing to analyze: locality of the swapped-in stuff for different worloads - if the swapped-in stuff has some locality, then it certainly should possible to fix the swapin code to do some kind of "swapahead". But if the stuff is swapped in completely randomly, only stuff like swap prefetch is going to help. The good thing about swap prefetch is that it fixes the problem today without forbidding future improvements to the VM. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
