From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 02:20:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 02:20:03 -0500 Received: from slc110.modem.xmission.com ([166.70.9.110]:39690 "EHLO flinx.biederman.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 02:19:31 -0500 To: zlatko@iskon.hr Cc: Linus Torvalds , Rik van Riel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Subtle MM bug In-Reply-To: <87n1d1mx2d.fsf@atlas.iskon.hr> From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: 08 Jan 2001 23:20:58 -0700 In-Reply-To: Zlatko Calusic's message of "09 Jan 2001 00:41:14 +0100" Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Zlatko Calusic writes: > > Yes, but a lot more data on the swap also means degraded performance, > because the disk head has to seek around in the much bigger area. Are > you sure this is all OK? I don't think we have more data on the swap, just more data has an allocated home on the swap. With the earlier allocation we should (I haven't verified) allocate contiguous chunks of memory contiguously on the swap. And reusing the same swap pages helps out with this. Eric - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/