From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [PATCH][0/8] (Targeting 2.6.17) Posix memory locking and balanced mlock-LRU semantic From: Arjan van de Ven In-Reply-To: <5c49b0ed0603201552j58150a18lbf4d0a9b0406d175@mail.gmail.com> References: <1142862078.3114.47.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <5c49b0ed0603201552j58150a18lbf4d0a9b0406d175@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 08:10:52 +0100 Message-Id: <1142925053.3077.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nate Diller Cc: Stone Wang , akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 15:52 -0800, Nate Diller wrote: > On 3/20/06, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > 1. Posix mlock/munlock/mlockall/munlockall. > > > Get mlock/munlock/mlockall/munlockall to Posix definiton: transaction-like, > > > just as described in the manpage(2) of mlock/munlock/mlockall/munlockall. > > > Thus users of mlock system call series will always have an clear map of > > > mlocked areas. > > > 2. More consistent LRU semantics in Memory Management. > > > Mlocked pages is placed on a separate LRU list: Wired List. > > > > please give this a more logical name, such as mlocked list or pinned > > list > > Shaoping, thanks for doing this work, it is something I have been > thinking about for the past few weeks. It's especially nice to be > able to see how many pages are pinned in this manner. > > Might I suggest calling it the long_term_pinned list? It also might > be worth putting ramdisk pages on this list, since they cannot be > written out in response to memory pressure. This would eliminate the > need for AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE. I like that idea -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org