Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1754932AbdDMRFB (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 13 Apr 2017 13:05:01 -0400
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.104]:43287
        "EHLO mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
        by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753137AbdDMRE6 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 13 Apr 2017 13:04:58 -0400
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.37,195,1488841200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="220357307"
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 19:04:56 +0200
From: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Re: Costless huge virtual memory? /dev/same, /dev/null?
Message-ID: <20170413170456.77abmvqs6b6b3hfx@var.youpi.perso.aquilenet.fr>
Mail-Followup-To: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org
References: <20160229162835.GA2816@var.bordeaux.inria.fr>
 <20170413094200.b4lftvumqt4g36hz@var.youpi.perso.aquilenet.fr>
 <20170413162946.jxyzfdggia2gge76@var.youpi.perso.aquilenet.fr>
 <20170413163411.GH784@bombadil.infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170413163411.GH784@bombadil.infradead.org>
Organization: I am not organized
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 847
Lines: 21

Matthew Wilcox, on jeu. 13 avril 2017 09:34:11 -0700, wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 06:29:46PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > (Ideally we'd be able to take the MAP_HUGETLB mmap flag into account to
> > map a single huge page repeatedly, even lowering the populating cost,
> > but AIUI of the current hugepage support it would be far from easy)
> 
> You could implement ->map_pages instead of (or as well as) ->fault, which
> would lower your costs if that is a concern.

Yes it is a concern.  I was a bit afraid that implementing map_pages
would be frowned upon, and getting in first a simple yet already useful
/dev/garbage would work better :)

I'm fine with doing either.

> I think the eventual intent is that map_pages would be able to
> populate a PMD or even a PUD.

Yes.  Allocating such a big page can be a problem, though.

Samuel