From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
To: Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: virtual mmap basics
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 09:27:30 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609250922040.23266@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4517CB69.9030600@shadowen.org>
On Mon, 25 Sep 2006, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> pfn_valid is most commonly required on virtual mem_map setups as its
> implementation (currently) violates the 'contiguious and present' out to
> MAX_ORDER constraint that the buddy expects. So we have additional
> frequent checks on pfn_valid in the allocator to check for it when there
> are holes within zones (which is virtual memmaps in all but name).
Why would the page allocator require frequent calls to pfn_valid? One
you have the free lists setup then there is no need for it AFAIK.
Still pfn_valid with virtual memmap is still comparable to sparses
current implementation. If the cpu has an instruction to check the
validity of an address then it will be superior.
> We also need to consider the size of the mem_map. The reason we have a
> problem with smaller machines is that virtual space in zone NORMAL is
> limited. The mem_map here has to be contigious and spase in KVA, this
> is exactly the resource we are short of.
The point of the virtual memmap is that it does not have to be contiguous
and it is sparse. Sparsemem could use that format and then we would be
able to optimize important VM function such as virt_to_page() and
page_address().
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-09-25 16:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-24 16:59 Christoph Lameter
2006-09-25 12:28 ` Andy Whitcroft
2006-09-25 16:27 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2006-09-25 17:11 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-09-25 21:05 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-09-25 22:22 ` Andy Whitcroft
2006-09-25 23:37 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-09-26 12:06 ` Andy Whitcroft
2006-09-25 18:09 ` Andy Whitcroft
2006-09-25 21:00 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-09-25 23:54 ` virtual memmap sparsity: Dealing with fragmented MAX_ORDER blocks Christoph Lameter
2006-09-26 0:31 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-09-26 12:11 ` Andy Whitcroft
2006-09-26 15:23 ` Christoph Lameter
2006-09-26 8:16 ` Mel Gorman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0609250922040.23266@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com \
--to=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=apw@shadowen.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox