Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1996 14:38:54 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: toor@dyson.iquest.net (John S. Dyson) Cc: terry@lambert.org, phk@critter.tfs.com, dyson@freebsd.org, peter@spinner.dialix.com, smp@freebsd.org, haertel@ichips.intel.com Subject: Re: some questions concerning TLB shootdowns in FreeBSD Message-ID: <199612142138.OAA22308@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199612142154.QAA05435@dyson.iquest.net> from "John S. Dyson" at Dec 14, 96 04:54:09 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > This would let us do device/offset as well as vnode/offset based caching > > (for instance, hanging all cache buffers for vnodes on a device off the > > device vnode). > > > > I've wanted this for some time, since I am determined that vclean must > > die... > > Slightly off subject, but I plan to sometime carry the vnode/offset > caching to a more generalized scheme that also encompasses device/offset > caching. Specifically, device/offset is the same as vnode/offset. > > This will allow us to cache data without the vnode. However, we will > continue to have the advantages of the current vnode/offset scheme. This is one of the reasons for murdering vclean: so you can get a cache hit on perfectly good data which is in memory, but for which the vnode has been reused, freed, destroyed, or whatever. Without the vnode, the perfectly good data can not get a cache hit... it has to be loaded in from disk again (potentially tromping other perfectly good data that is also in cache, but is older than the perfectly good data we can no longer reference -- bletch). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199612142138.OAA22308>