Re: No more bits in vm_area_struct's vm_flags.

[Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>]

On Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Hugh Dickins wrote:

> Are we doing that?  If you have some example like, when PG_slab is set
> then PG_owner_priv_1 means such-and-such, but if not not: okay, I'm
> fine with that.

Look at how compound pages are handled in include/linux/page-flags.h

> But if you're saying something like, if PG_reclaim is set at the same
> time as PG_buddy, then they mean the page is not a buddy or under
> reclaim, but brokenbacked: then I'm a bit (or even 32 bits) worried.

Of course you need to be careful not to use two bits that can be used
indepedently.

> > VM_HUGETLB cannot grow up and down f.e. and there are
> > certainly lots of other impossible combinations that can be used to put
> > more information into the flags.
>
> Where it makes sense, where it's understandable, okay: there may be a
> few which could naturally use combinations.  But in general, no, I
> think we'd be asking for endless maintenance trouble if we change the
> meaning of some flags according to other flags.

We made the page flags stuff configurable. On 64 bit we use more flags, on
32 bit we compress the page flags a bit. Maybe do the same for vm_flags?


--
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>