On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 17:19:21 -0500
Rik van Riel <[email protected]> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > Of course it would. But how do you know it is "too expensive"? We "scan
> > all the vmas mapping a page" as a matter of course in the page scanner -
> > millions of times a minute. If that's "too expensive" then ouch.
>
> We can do it lazily.
>
> At mlock time, move pages onto the mlocked list, unless they
> are there already.
Needs another page flag to determine what list the page is on (eek).
> On munlock, move pages to the active list.
We'd need to determine whether some other vma has mlocked the page too.
That's either the page_struct refcount or the vma walk. The latter is
equivalent to what I'm suggesting.
> For mlock-only
> memory (shared memory segments?) we could add a simple check
> to see if the next process on the list has the page mlocked,
> checking only that one.
>
> While scanning the active list, move mlocked pages that are
> found back onto the mlocked list.
>
> This lazy movement of pages will impact shared libraries,
> but probably not shared memory segments.
>
> Does this sound workable?
I'm still not sure what problem we're trying to solve here.
Knowing how many mlocked pages there are in a zone doesn't sound terribly
interesting and I don't recall ever wanting to know that.
Being able to keep mlocked pages off the LRU altogether sounds more useful.
It's all rather a tight corner case - people don't use mlock much.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
