From: Ingo Oeser <ingo.oeser@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
Subject: Re: RFC: design for new VM
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 21:37:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20000803213705.C759@nightmaster.csn.tu-chemnitz.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10008031020440.6384-100000@penguin.transmeta.com>; from torvalds@transmeta.com on Thu, Aug 03, 2000 at 11:05:47AM -0700
On Thu, Aug 03, 2000 at 11:05:47AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> As far as I can tell, the only advantage of multiple lists compared to the
> current one is to avoid overhead in walking extra pages, no?
[...]
> As far as I can tell, the above is _exactly_ equivalent to having one
> single list, and multiple "scan-points" on that list.
[...]
3 keywords:
- reordering of the list breaks _all_ scanpoints
- wraparound inside the scanner breaks ordering or it should
store it's starting point globally
- state transistions _require_ reordering, which will affect
all scanners
conclusions:
- scanners can only run exclusive (spinlock()ed) one at a
point, if they can ever reorder the list, until the reach
their temporally success or wrap point
- scanners, that don't reorder the list have to be run under
the guarantee, that the list will _never_ change until they
reach their wrap point or succeed for now
Isn't this really bad for performance? It would imply a lot of
waiting, but I haven't measured this ;-)
With the multiple list approach we can skip pages easily and
avoid contention and stuck scanners (waiting for the list_lock to
become free).
Even your headache with the "purpose" of the lists might get
adressed, if you consider adding a queue in between for the
special state you need (like "dirty_but_not_really_list" ;-)).
The only wish _I_ have is having portal functions for _all_ state
transitions, which can be used as entry point for future
extensions which should continue adding portal functions for
their own transistions.
Practical example: *Nobody* was able to tell me, where we stop
accessing a swapped out page (so it can be encrypted) and
where we start accessing a swapped in page (so it has to be
decrypted).
Would be no problem (nor a question ;-)) with portal functions
for this important state transition.
PS: Maybe I didn't get your point with the "scan-points"
approach.
Regards
Ingo Oeser
--
Feel the power of the penguin - run linux@your.pc
<esc>:x
--
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.eu.org/Linux-MM/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-08-03 19:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-08-02 22:08 Rik van Riel
2000-08-03 7:19 ` Chris Wedgwood
2000-08-03 16:01 ` Rik van Riel
2000-08-04 15:41 ` Matthew Dillon
2000-08-04 17:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2000-08-04 23:51 ` Matthew Dillon
2000-08-05 0:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2000-08-05 1:52 ` Matthew Dillon
2000-08-05 1:09 ` Matthew Wilcox
2000-08-05 2:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2000-08-05 2:17 ` Alexander Viro
2000-08-07 17:55 ` Matthew Dillon
2000-08-05 22:48 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2000-08-03 18:27 ` lamont
2000-08-03 18:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2000-08-03 19:11 ` Chris Wedgwood
2000-08-03 21:04 ` Benjamin C.R. LaHaise
2000-08-03 19:32 ` Rik van Riel
2000-08-03 18:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2000-08-03 18:50 ` Rik van Riel
2000-08-03 20:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2000-08-03 22:05 ` Rik van Riel
2000-08-03 22:19 ` Linus Torvalds
2000-08-03 19:00 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-08-03 19:29 ` Rik van Riel
2000-08-03 20:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2000-08-03 19:37 ` Ingo Oeser [this message]
2000-08-03 20:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2000-08-03 21:56 ` Ingo Oeser
2000-08-03 22:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2000-08-04 2:33 ` David Gould
2000-08-16 15:10 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2000-08-03 19:26 ` Roger Larsson
2000-08-03 21:50 ` Rik van Riel
2000-08-03 22:28 ` Roger Larsson
2000-08-04 13:52 Mark_H_Johnson
[not found] <8725692F.0079E22B.00@d53mta03h.boulder.ibm.com>
2000-08-07 17:40 ` Gerrit.Huizenga
2000-08-07 18:37 ` Matthew Wilcox
2000-08-07 20:55 ` Chuck Lever
2000-08-07 21:59 ` Rik van Riel
2000-08-08 3:26 ` David Gould
2000-08-08 5:54 ` Kanoj Sarcar
2000-08-08 7:15 ` David Gould
[not found] <87256934.0072FA16.00@d53mta04h.boulder.ibm.com>
2000-08-08 0:36 ` Gerrit.Huizenga
[not found] <87256934.0078DADB.00@d53mta03h.boulder.ibm.com>
2000-08-08 0:48 ` Gerrit.Huizenga
2000-08-08 15:21 ` Rik van Riel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20000803213705.C759@nightmaster.csn.tu-chemnitz.de \
--to=ingo.oeser@informatik.tu-chemnitz.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@conectiva.com.br \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox