If I understand you right, your scheme has the fundamental flaw that one
dcache entry on a page can keep an entire page full of "slackers" in
memory, and since there is little correlation in usage between dcache
entries that happen to get stored on a page, the result is that the
effectiveness
Oliver Xymoron wrote:
>
>Can we get you to agree that basically all subpage objects are immovable?
>
No. Certainly not in the general case, and I think Josh found ways to
handle the dcache case. If we can simply free the old objects, we don't
actually have to move the hot ones, as he points o
Josh MacDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[...]
> We're not talking about actively referenced entries, we're talking about
> entries on the d_lru list with zero references. Relocating those objects
> should not require any more locking than currently required to remove and
> re-insert the dcache
