On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 04:32:43AM -0800, Chuck Silvers wrote:

 > > given the assumptions in UVM (that inactive pages have no mappings)
 > > the above if statement should never fire.   that is prob. why chucks
 > > deleted this statement in UBC.
 > 
 > yup, that's what I was thinking when I removed it, but I didn't notice
 > that the other check wasn't there.  
 > 
 > has anyone tried putting back the check that I removed and seeing
 > how much of a difference that makes?  I'd try it myself, but I'm
 > about as far away from my test machines as I can get while still
 > remaining on the same planet.

Putting that check back into the inactive scan isn't going to really
do anything, as nothing can reference the unmapped page.  However,
putting is referenced check into the active list scan, and allowing
mapped pages to exist on the inactive list, plenty of reactivations
happen.

My laptop seems to be running much better under load -- X and emacs
respond as they should, as opposed to major lagging.

-- 
        -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@zembu.com>