Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> > if you look at DaveM first full rmap implementation it never had a
> > pte-chain. He used the same rmap logic we always hand in linux since the
> > first 2.1 kernel I looked at, to handle correctly truncate against
> > MAP_SHARED. Unfortunately that's not very efficient and requires some
> > metadata allocation for anonymous pages (that's the address space
> > pointer, anon pages regularly doesn't have a dedicated address space),
>
> Together with the K42 people we found a way to avoid the
> badnesses of an object-based VM.
>
eek. Please let's not tie the delivery of the 2.6 kernel to
the success of this R&D effort. We need reasonable-sized fixes, fast,
for the current problems so that people who have feature work banked
up can get going on it.
Plus, staying close to the 2.4 rmap VM allows us to leverage the
testing and experience which that has had, yes?
-
Rik van Riel wrote:
>> Together with the K42 people we found a way to avoid the
>> badnesses of an object-based VM.
On Sun, Jul 28, 2002 at 07:14:03PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> eek. Please let's not tie the delivery of the 2.6 kernel to
> the success of this R&D effort. We need reasonable-sized fixes, fast,
> for the current problems so that people who have feature work banked
> up can get going on it.
> Plus, staying close to the 2.4 rmap VM allows us to leverage the
> testing and experience which that has had, yes?
If this is the direction we're headed there are some tasks I won't
be able to get out of. I was ready for double and/or triple duty
anyway, though.
Cheers,
Bill
On Sun, 28 Jul 2002, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Together with the K42 people we found a way to avoid the
> > badnesses of an object-based VM.
>
> eek. Please let's not tie the delivery of the 2.6 kernel to the success
> of this R&D effort. We need reasonable-sized fixes, fast, for the
> current problems so that people who have feature work banked up can get
> going on it.
Fully agreed. We can go with the mechanisms we have now and
should only work on new mechanisms later.
I'm planning to keep the whole K42-style VM thing in design
stage at least until after the feature freeze...
(just so nobody gets tempted to sneak it into the kernel ;))
regards,
Rik
--
Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH".
http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/