(no subject)

[Colonel]

From: Colonel <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
CC: [e-mail]
In-reply-to: <[e-mail]>
	(message from Marcelo Tosatti on Mon, 23 Apr 2001 20:31:12 -0300
	(BRT))
Subject: Re: 2.4.4-pre6 :  THANKS!  very snappy here [nt]
Reply-to: [e-mail]
References:  <[e-mail]>

   Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 20:31:12 -0300 (BRT)
   From: Marcelo Tosatti <[e-mail]>
   X-Sender: [e-mail]

   Just as curiosity --- did it got faster in pre5 ? 

   On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Colonel wrote:

   > but since you read it, system seems like it's running twice as fast

Actually, it made not be pre6.  I patched the kernel per some thread
on LKML a few days before, but had not had the opportunity to reboot
and run it until pre6.  The patch was :

--- linux/mm/page_alloc.c.~1~	Tue Mar 20 15:05:46 2001
+++ linux/mm/page_alloc.c	Sat Apr 21 19:01:47 2001
@@ -454,7 +454,6 @@
 		if (gfp_mask & __GFP_WAIT) {
 			memory_pressure++;
 			try_to_free_pages(gfp_mask);
-			wakeup_bdflush(0);
 			goto try_again;
 		}
 	}

It would make more sense that the above change was responsible for the
improvement.