On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 05:06:37PM +0200, Richard Braun wrote:
> If no major objection is raised (particularly about the new Mig
> routine), I'll commit this patch in a few days.
As I intend to continue working on the page cache, and because the
policy patch alone can't be included now, I have cre
At Sun, 15 Jul 2012 19:35:31 +0200,
Richard Braun wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 06:39:05PM +0200, Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> > I'd encourage you to use a more self-describing data structure. In
> > the very least, please consider a version number and a bitmask
> > indicating which fields are
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 06:39:05PM +0200, Neal H. Walfield wrote:
> I'd encourage you to use a more self-describing data structure. In
> the very least, please consider a version number and a bitmask
> indicating which fields are valid.
What about versioning the call itself, e.g. vm_cache_statist
At Sat, 14 Jul 2012 17:06:37 +0200,
Richard Braun wrote:
>
> If no major objection is raised (particularly about the new Mig
> routine), I'll commit this patch in a few days.
> ...
> +struct vm_cache_statistics {
> + integer_t object_count; /* # of cached objects */
> + integer_t
If no major objection is raised (particularly about the new Mig
routine), I'll commit this patch in a few days.
The decision to add the call to the mach4 interface stems from
pragmatism. It doesn't break existing compatibility, and it doesn't add
the burden of a new interface.
---
include/mach/ma
