From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 09:27:02 -0800 (PST) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH][0/8] (Targeting 2.6.17) Posix memory locking and balanced mlock-LRU semantic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Stone Wang Cc: akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Stone Wang wrote: > 2. More consistent LRU semantics in Memory Management. > Mlocked pages is placed on a separate LRU list: Wired List. > The pages dont take part in LRU algorithms,for they could never be swapped, > until munlocked. This also implies that dirty bits of the pte for mlocked pages are never checked. Currently light swapping (which is very common) will scan over all pages and move the dirty bits from the pte into struct page. This may take awhile but at least at some point we will write out dirtied pages. The result of not scanning mlocked pages will be that mmapped files will not be updated unless either the process terminates or msync() is called. -- 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