From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262040AbUBDOaW (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Feb 2004 09:30:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262308AbUBDOaW (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Feb 2004 09:30:22 -0500 Received: from intra.cyclades.com ([64.186.161.6]:39316 "EHLO intra.cyclades.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262040AbUBDOaV (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Feb 2004 09:30:21 -0500 Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 12:30:14 -0200 (BRST) From: Marcelo Tosatti X-X-Sender: marcelo@logos.cnet To: Robert Love Cc: marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] 2.4's sys_readahead is borked In-Reply-To: <1075853962.8022.3.camel@localhost> Message-ID: References: <1075853962.8022.3.camel@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Cyclades-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-Cyclades-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Robert Love wrote: > In 2.4, sys_readahead() performs readahead against a maximum of half the > number of inactive pages. This is dumb, as it ignores the number of > free pages completely. Worse, in certain situations, such as boot, the > inactive list can be quite small and the free list quite large, but > readahead(2) won't do anything. > > The right thing to do is limit sys_readahead() to a maximum of half of > the sum of the number of free pages and inactive pages, which is what > 2.6 does. Hi Robert, This looks okay, applied. Question: Do you know any user of sys_readahead() ?