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

From: Hanna Linder (hannal@us.ibm.com)
Date: Wed Feb 27 2002 - 18:32:23 EST


--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

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 28 2002 - 21:00:40 EST