From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 05:38:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 05:38:26 -0400 Received: from humbolt.nl.linux.org ([131.211.28.48]:32781 "EHLO humbolt.nl.linux.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 05:38:07 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Daniel Phillips To: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman), "Rob Fuller" Subject: Re: broken VM in 2.4.10-pre9 Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 11:45:44 +0200 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.1] Cc: , In-Reply-To: <878A2048A35CD141AD5FC92C6B776E4907BB98@xchgind02.nsisw.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <20010919093828Z17304-2759+92@humbolt.nl.linux.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On September 17, 2001 06:03 pm, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > In linux we have avoided reverse maps (unlike the BSD's) which tends > to make the common case fast at the expense of making it more > difficult to handle times when the VM system is under extreme load and > we are swapping etc. What do you suppose is the cost of the reverse map? I get the impression you think it's more expensive than it is. -- Daniel