Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] ZERO PAGE again v2

["KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>]

Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 11:12:38PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>> BTW, ksm has no refcnt pingpong problem ?
>
> Well sure it has, the refcount has to be increased when pages are
> shared, just like for regular fork() on anonymous memory, but the
> point is that you pay for it only when you're saving ram, so the
> probability that is just pure overhead is lower than for the zero
> page... it always depend on the app. I simply suggest in trying
> it... perhaps zero page is way to go for your users.. they should
> tell, not us...
>
My point is that we don't have to say "Unless you evolve yourself,
you'll die" to users. they will evolve by themselves if they are sane.
As I said, I like ksm. But demanding users to rewrite private apps is
different problem. I'd like to say "You can live as you're. but here,
there is better options" rather than "die!".
Adding documentation/advertisement and show pros. and cons. of ksm or
something correct is what we can do for increasing sane users.

Thanks,
-Kame


--
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>