Re: [PATCH] stub MADV_FREE implementation

2007-05-09 Thread Ulrich Drepper
On 5/8/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: And has Ulrich indicated that glibc would indeed go out ahead of the kernel in this fashion? Rik is concerned to get a glibc version which allows him to test the improvements. That's really not a big problem. We laready have a patch for this

Re: [PATCH] stub MADV_FREE implementation

2007-05-08 Thread Andrew Morton
On Mon, 07 May 2007 23:51:47 -0400 Rik van Riel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Until we have better performance numbers on the lazy reclaim path, > we can just alias MADV_FREE to MADV_DONTNEED with this trivial > patch. > > This way glibc can go ahead with the optimization on their side > and we ca

[PATCH] stub MADV_FREE implementation

2007-05-07 Thread Rik van Riel
Until we have better performance numbers on the lazy reclaim path, we can just alias MADV_FREE to MADV_DONTNEED with this trivial patch. This way glibc can go ahead with the optimization on their side and we can figure out the kernel side later. Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -