From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-f176.google.com (mail-ig0-f176.google.com [209.85.213.176]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FF736B0036 for ; Mon, 26 May 2014 16:19:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-ig0-f176.google.com with SMTP id hl10so320857igb.3 for ; Mon, 26 May 2014 13:19:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ig0-x233.google.com (mail-ig0-x233.google.com [2607:f8b0:4001:c05::233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s1si1812655ign.15.2014.05.26.13.19.16 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 26 May 2014 13:19:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ig0-f179.google.com with SMTP id hn18so329903igb.0 for ; Mon, 26 May 2014 13:19:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20140526145605.016140154@infradead.org> References: <20140526145605.016140154@infradead.org> Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 00:19:16 +0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] VM_PINNED From: Konstantin Khlebnikov Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Christoph Lameter , Thomas Gleixner , Andrew Morton , Hugh Dickins , Mel Gorman , Roland Dreier , Sean Hefty , Hal Rosenstock , Mike Marciniszyn On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Hi all, > > I mentioned at LSF/MM that I wanted to revive this, and at the time there were > no disagreements. > > I finally got around to refreshing the patch(es) so here goes. > > These patches introduce VM_PINNED infrastructure, vma tracking of persistent > 'pinned' page ranges. Pinned is anything that has a fixed phys address (as > required for say IO DMA engines) and thus cannot use the weaker VM_LOCKED. One > popular way to pin pages is through get_user_pages() but that not nessecarily > the only way. Lol, this looks like resurrection of VM_RESERVED which I've removed not so long time ago. Maybe single-bit state isn't flexible enought? This supposed to supports pinning only by one user and only in its own mm? This might be done as extension of existing memory-policy engine. It allows to keep vm_area_struct slim in normal cases and change behaviour when needed. memory-policy might hold reference-counter of "pinners", track ownership and so on. > > Roland, as said, I need some IB assistance, see patches 4 and 5, where I got > lost in the qib and ipath code. > > Patches 1-3 compile tested. > > -- > 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 -- 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