* About performance related to do_map
@ 2001-05-15 17:13 Hua Ji
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Hua Ji @ 2001-05-15 17:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-mm
Folks,
When reading source codes, get a question. Thanks in advance.
Function do_map() ./mm/mmap.c,
After/if we get a vma by using **get_unmapped_area**, why we still
double-check
the vma area by using do_munmap()?
This call to do_munmap()is ONLY NECESSARY when (flags & MAP_FIXED) is
**TRUE**.
The do_munmap will bring some EXTRA cost with the look up the vma linked
list or/and AVL tree.
Also, why not check it first before we create a new vma area? We don't have
to create a vma first and then release it afterwards when lateron we find
out that this vma is overlapped by some other vma area already.
Mike
------------------------------------------------
/* Obtain the address to map to. we verify (or select) it and ensure
* that it represents a valid section of the address space.
*/
if (flags & MAP_FIXED) {
if (addr & ~PAGE_MASK)
return -EINVAL;
} else {
addr = get_unmapped_area(addr, len);
if (!addr)
return -ENOMEM;
}
--
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/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2001-05-15 17:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-05-15 17:13 About performance related to do_map Hua Ji
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox