From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4032388CC14 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2021 13:12:25 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org B4032388CC14 Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-532-d4x0iVGmMPCo_s9TLfGxvA-1; Thu, 08 Jul 2021 09:12:22 -0400 X-MC-Unique: d4x0iVGmMPCo_s9TLfGxvA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1526F9126D; Thu, 8 Jul 2021 13:12:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (ovpn-112-13.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.112.13]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC26D5C1D5; Thu, 8 Jul 2021 13:12:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fche by redhat.com with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1m1TpE-0007Fx-Du; Thu, 08 Jul 2021 09:12:20 -0400 Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2021 09:12:20 -0400 From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" To: Mark Wielaard Cc: Noah Sanci , elfutils-devel@sourceware.org Subject: Re: PR: 25978 Message-ID: <20210708131220.GB31689@redhat.com> References: <6360cc559a7ab536688ce70e79fc6334709eddee.camel@klomp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6360cc559a7ab536688ce70e79fc6334709eddee.camel@klomp.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.0 (2019-05-25) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, KAM_NUMSUBJECT, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: elfutils-devel@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Elfutils-devel mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2021 13:12:27 -0000 Hi - > If they are portions of the full fdcache shouldn't there be a check in > the code that the specified fdcache_prefetch_fds and > fdcache_prefetch_mbs aren't larger than fdcache_fds and fdcache_mbs? Or > maybe they should be given as percentages? We've iterated on a couple of ways of representing & controlling this. The code makes the lru and prefetch caches separate, in that they have separate limits and separate metrics. So there is no requirement for the prefetch one to be smaller than the other. (We will probably want to tweak the defaults to be a little larger at some point.) - FChE