Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756639AbXLSNpx (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:45:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753478AbXLSNpp (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:45:45 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:40362 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753443AbXLSNpo (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:45:44 -0500 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:45:34 -0500 From: Rik van Riel To: Nick Piggin Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lee Schermerhorn Subject: Re: [patch 17/20] non-reclaimable mlocked pages Message-ID: <20071219084534.4fee8718@bree.surriel.com> In-Reply-To: <200712191156.48507.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> References: <20071218211539.250334036@redhat.com> <20071218211550.186819416@redhat.com> <200712191156.48507.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Organization: Red Hat, Inc. X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.0.2 (GTK+ 2.10.4; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1826 Lines: 47 On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:56:48 +1100 Nick Piggin wrote: > On Wednesday 19 December 2007 08:15, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > Rework of a patch by Nick Piggin -- part 1 of 2. > > > > This patch: > > > > 1) defines the [CONFIG_]NORECLAIM_MLOCK sub-option and the > > stub version of the mlock/noreclaim APIs when it's > > not configured. Depends on [CONFIG_]NORECLAIM. > Hmm, I still don't know (or forgot) why you don't just use the > old scheme of having an mlock count in the LRU bit, and removing > the mlocked page from the LRU completely. How do we detect those pages reliably in the lumpy reclaim code? > These mlocked pages don't need to be on a non-reclaimable list, > because we can find them again via the ptes when they become > unlocked, and there is no point background scanning them, because > they're always going to be locked while they're mlocked. Agreed. The main reason I sent out these patches now is that I just wanted to get some comments from other upstream developers. I have gotten distracted by other work so much that I spent most of my time forward porting the patch set, and not enough time working with the rest of the upstream community to get the code moving forward. To be honest, I have only briefly looked at the non-reclaimable code. I would be more than happy to merge any improvements to that code. -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/