On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, Brent Casavant wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > Confused. Is this for applications which cannot be taught to use the
> > mempolicy API?
>
> In general yes. Anything that writes into a tmpfs filesystem is liable
> to disproportionately decrease the available memory on a particular node.
> Since there's no telling what sort of application (e.g. dd/cp/cat) might be
> dropping large files there, this lets the admin choose the appropriate
> default behavior for their site's situation.
I look at it differently, and would answer Andrew's question with "no"
rather than "yes". The mempolicy API applies only to userspace mappings:
so it covers shared memory fine, but cannot be applied to tmpfs files.
Whereas mount's mpol= applies to tmpfs files, and (unfortunately?) cannot
be applied to shm (since that's on an internal mount with no options).
The only overlap comes when a tmpfs file is mmap'ed: then it's possible
to apply the mempolicy API to it, and refine what mount's mpol= defined.
There's been talk in the past of mempolicy for pagecache, which would
also allow mount's mpol= to be refined per file; but that's not appeared.
Hugh
-
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]
