From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 07:51:46 -0700 From: "Martin J. Bligh" Reply-To: "Martin J. Bligh" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.5.43-mm2] New shared page table patch Message-ID: <2834413140.1035445904@[10.10.2.3]> In-Reply-To: <9100000.1035470286@baldur.austin.ibm.com> References: <9100000.1035470286@baldur.austin.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Dave McCracken , Bill Davidsen Cc: Rik van Riel , "Eric W. Biederman" , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel , Linux Memory Management List-ID: >>> Another thought, how does this play with NUMA systems? I don't have the >>> problem, but presumably there are implications. >> >> At some point we'll probably only want one shared set per node. >> Gets tricky when you migrate processes across nodes though - will >> need more thought > > Page tables can only be shared when they're pointing to the same > data pages anyway, so I think it's just part of the larger problem > of node-local memory. Yes, same problem as text replication. You're right, it's probably not worth solving otherwise - too small a percentage of the real problem. M. -- 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/