From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
Cc: Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] vm-mapped-x-active-lists
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 23:37:20 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040309073720.GJ655@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <404D7109.10902@cyberone.com.au>
William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> Current efforts are now a background/spare time affair centering around
>> non-i386 architectures and driver audits.
On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 06:23:53PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> OK. I had just noticed that the people complaining about rmap most
> are the ones using 4K page size (x86-64 uses 4K, doesn't it?). Not
> that this fact means it is OK to ignore them problem, but I thought
> maybe pgcl might solve it in a more general way.
> I wonder how much you gain with objrmap / anobjrmap on say a 64K page
> architecture?
pgcl doesn't reduce userspace's mapping granularity. The current
implementation has the same pte_chain overhead as mainline for the same
virtualspace mapped. It's unclear how feasible it is to reduce this
overhead, though various proposals have gone around. I've ignored the
potential pte_chain reduction issue entirely in favor of concentrating
on more basic correctness and functionality. The removal of the 1:1 pte
page : struct page assumption is the vastly more important aspect of
anobjrmap in relation to pgcl, since removing that assumption would
remove a significant piece of complexity.
-- wli
--
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: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-09 7:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-09 5:32 [RFC][PATCH 0/4] VM split active lists Nick Piggin
2004-03-09 5:33 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/4] vm-lrutopage-cleanup Nick Piggin
2004-03-09 5:33 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/4] vm-nofixed-active-list Nick Piggin
2004-03-09 5:34 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/4] vm-no-reclaim_mapped Nick Piggin
2004-03-09 5:35 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/4] vm-mapped-x-active-lists Nick Piggin
2004-03-09 5:39 ` Nick Piggin
2004-03-09 5:47 ` Mike Fedyk
2004-03-09 6:06 ` Nick Piggin
2004-03-09 7:02 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-03-09 7:23 ` Nick Piggin
2004-03-09 7:37 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]
2004-03-09 9:24 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-03-09 15:26 ` Marc-Christian Petersen
2004-03-09 15:42 ` Nikita Danilov
2004-03-10 2:49 ` Nick Piggin
2004-03-10 5:10 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/4] VM split active lists Nick Piggin
2004-03-12 9:58 ` Hans Reiser
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=20040309073720.GJ655@holomorphy.com \
--to=wli@holomorphy.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mfedyk@matchmail.com \
--cc=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
/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