On Thu, 24 Jun 1999 11:09:42 -0400 (EDT), Chuck Lever <cel@monkey.org>
said:
> since i don't have the history that you and others here might have, can
> you tell me why the inode cache is implemented so that it uses raw pages
> and never shrinks? is it simply older than the slab cache
> implementation?
The original inode cache is ancient. The slab only arrived in 2.1. The
inode.c was pretty much rewritten in 2.1 too, but the underlying data
structures predate slab by a long, long way.
> would there be any advantage to a re-implementation?
Potentially.
--Stephen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/