Re: Some thoughts on memory policies

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 20 Jun 2007, Paul Mundt wrote:

> There's quite a bit of room for improving and extending the existing
> code, and those options should likely be exhausted first.

There is a confusing maze of special rules if one goes beyond the simple 
process address space case. There are no clean rules on how to combine 
memory policies. Refcounting / updating becomes a problem because policies 
are intended to be only updated from the process that set them up. Look at 
the gimmicks that Paul needed to do to update memory policies when a 
process is migrated and the vmas on the stack for shmem etc etc.

-
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]
  Powered by Linux