Re: [Lse-tech] lockmeter results comparing 2.4.17, 2.5.3, and 2.5.5

[Hanna Linder <hannal@us.ibm.com>]

--On Wednesday, February 27, 2002 16:48:07 -0500 Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu> wrote:

> 
> ed mm/vmscan.c <<EOF
> /shrink_icache_memory/s/priority/1/
> w
> q
> EOF
> 
> and repeat the tests.  Unreferenced inodes == useless inodes.  Aging is
> already taken care of in dcache and anything that had fallen through
> is fair game.
> 

FYI:

The patch does this:

*** vmscan.c.orig	Wed Feb 27 14:09:49 2002
--- vmscan.c	Wed Feb 27 14:10:16 2002
***************
*** 578,584 ****
  		return 0;
  
  	shrink_dcache_memory(priority, gfp_mask);
! 	shrink_icache_memory(priority, gfp_mask);
  #ifdef CONFIG_QUOTA
  	shrink_dqcache_memory(DEF_PRIORITY, gfp_mask);
  #endif
--- 578,584 ----
  		return 0;
  
  	shrink_dcache_memory(priority, gfp_mask);
! 	shrink_icache_memory(1, gfp_mask);
  #ifdef CONFIG_QUOTA
  	shrink_dqcache_memory(DEF_PRIORITY, gfp_mask);
  #endif