From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Sun,  8 Jun 2014 13:34:22 -0400
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <ff37984f5633539b4d7228d9234ded35@brasstown.quanstro.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAOw7k5hX=_QzB7dTrEeOOBWXfqQc=7TxFMaa2-L5NkrSzm0FqQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <febeb72da75dd219fc0d15dbc8b6de89@ivey>
	<CAOw7k5hX=_QzB7dTrEeOOBWXfqQc=7TxFMaa2-L5NkrSzm0FqQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] duppage
Topicbox-Message-UUID: f7e767fa-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> that doesn't make any sense.  duppage copied the page the wrong way
> round (used the image page and put another copy in).  eliminating
> duppage simply copies the page from the image cache instead of using
> that page.  there isn't any i/o in either case.

well, those are the measurements.  do you think they are misleading?  perhaps
with the pio happening in another context?  i haven't hunted this down.

- erik