Re: Page Replacement in 2.6.10

[Rahul Iyer <rni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > 2. The current design allows kind of restricts to page cache to it's current
> > active/inactive list form. Wouldn't it be better to generalize this? For
> > example, something like
> >
> > struct page_cache {
> >   struct list_head[MAX_LISTS];
> >   void (*add_to_cache)(struct page *p);
> >   void (*del_from_cache)(struct page *);
> >   void (*page_accessed)(struct page *);
> > };
> >
> > In this way, one could have multiple page caches as desired, and could select
> > at complie time or maybe eve boot time (via a kernel arg). Now, writing a new
> > page replacement policy is as simple as implementing the above struct. Does
> > this make any sense? Or am i missing the big picture?
> >    
>
> How would you decide from which page cache to free pages ?
>  
I think i worded it wrong... There is only 1 page cache. It's structure 
and replacement policy could be chosen at boot time. For example, you 
could select kernel boot time argument, say page_cache, as 
page_cache=LRU and the page cache would follow an LRU based replacement 
scheme. Or maybe page_cache=CART and you'd have CART instead.
Hope i got the explanation right this time around.
ciao
rahul


--
Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel.
Archive:       http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/
FAQ:           http://kernelnewbies.org/faq/