From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B519D6B0073 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:19:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:18:55 +0100 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: RFC: Transparent Hugepage support Message-ID: <20091028171855.GU7744@basil.fritz.box> References: <87ljiwk8el.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <20091027193007.GA6043@random.random> <20091028042805.GJ7744@basil.fritz.box> <20091028120050.GD9640@random.random> <20091028141803.GQ7744@basil.fritz.box> <20091028154827.GF9640@random.random> <20091028160352.GS7744@basil.fritz.box> <20091028162206.GG9640@random.random> <20091028163458.GT7744@basil.fritz.box> <1256749015.5613.31.camel@aglitke> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1256749015.5613.31.camel@aglitke> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Adam Litke Cc: Andi Kleen , Andrea Arcangeli , linux-mm@kvack.org, Marcelo Tosatti , Avi Kivity , Izik Eidus , Hugh Dickins , Nick Piggin , Andrew Morton List-ID: On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 11:56:55AM -0500, Adam Litke wrote: > > I think you need some user visible interfaces to cleanly handle existing > > reservations on a process base at least, otherwise you'll completely break > > their semantics. > > But we already handle explicit hugepages (with page pools and strict > reservations) via hugetlbfs and libhugetlbfs. It seems you're just > making an argument for keeping these around (which I certainly agree > with). That would require not supporting reservations through the transparent mechanism. That wouldn't be very nice semantics, because you end up with "glass jaw" performance always in the transparent case. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only. -- 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