From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965637AbXIBLoT (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2007 07:44:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964990AbXIBLoG (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2007 07:44:06 -0400 Received: from netops-testserver-4-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.29]:58485 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964984AbXIBLoF (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Sep 2007 07:44:05 -0400 Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2007 04:44:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: clameter@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com To: Peter Zijlstra cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [00/36] Large Blocksize Support V6 In-Reply-To: <1188674255.6432.3.camel@lappy> Message-ID: References: <20070828190551.415127746@sgi.com> <1188674255.6432.3.camel@lappy> 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 On Sat, 1 Sep 2007, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > by mixing large order pages into the regular lru, page aging gets rather > unfair. Not in general, only for particular loads. On average this is okay. It is consistent to age the whole block and not just a part of it.