summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/open_issues/performance/io_system/read-ahead.mdwn
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'open_issues/performance/io_system/read-ahead.mdwn')
-rw-r--r--open_issues/performance/io_system/read-ahead.mdwn19
1 files changed, 19 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/open_issues/performance/io_system/read-ahead.mdwn b/open_issues/performance/io_system/read-ahead.mdwn
index 241cda41..3ee30b5d 100644
--- a/open_issues/performance/io_system/read-ahead.mdwn
+++ b/open_issues/performance/io_system/read-ahead.mdwn
@@ -278,3 +278,22 @@ IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-02-15
<antrik> BTW, I remembered now that KAM's GSoC application should have a
pretty good description of the necessary changes... unfortunately, these
are not publicly visible IIRC :-(
+
+---
+
+IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-02-16
+
+ <etenil> braunr: I've looked in the kernel to see where prefetching would
+ fit best. We talked of the VM yesterday, but I'm not sure about it. It
+ seems to me that the device part of the kernel makes more sense since
+ it's logically what manages devices, am I wrong?
+ <braunr> etenil: you are
+ <braunr> etenil: well
+ <braunr> etenil: drivers should already support clustered sector
+ read/writes
+ <etenil> ah
+ <braunr> but yes, there must be support in the drivers too
+ <braunr> what would really benefit the Hurd mostly concerns page faults, so
+ the right place is the VM subsystem
+
+[[clustered_page_faults]]