Re: [PATCH] modified segq for 2.5

William Lee Irwin III
2002-09-09T23:32:11Z

On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> Ideally some distinction would be nice, even if only to distinguish I/O
>> demanded to be done directly by the workload from background writeback
>> and/or readahead.

On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 07:54:29PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> OK, are we talking about page replacement or does queue scanning
> have priority over the quality of page replacement ? ;)

This is relatively tangential. The concern expressed has more to do
with VM writeback starving workload-issued I/O than page replacement.

Cheers,
Bill