Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 9 Feb 2002 15:21:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 9 Feb 2002 15:21:26 -0500 Received: from shed.alex.org.uk ([195.224.53.219]:24267 "HELO shed.alex.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sat, 9 Feb 2002 15:21:08 -0500 Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2002 20:21:01 -0000 From: Alex Bligh - linux-kernel Reply-To: Alex Bligh - linux-kernel To: Daniel Phillips , Ulrich Weigand , zaitcev@redhat.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alex Bligh - linux-kernel Subject: Re: The IBM order relaxation patch Message-ID: <2345050357.1013286061@[195.224.237.69]> In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --On Thursday, 07 February, 2002 3:12 PM +0100 Daniel Phillips wrote: > Maybe Rik's >> rmap method could help here, because with reverse mappings we >> can at least try to free adjacent areas (because we then at least >> *know* who's using the pages). > > Yes, that's one of leading reasons for wanting rmap. (Number one and two > reasons are: allow forcible unmapping of multiply referenced pages for > swapout; get more reliable hardware ref bit readings.) > > Note that even if we can do forcible freeing we still have to deal with > the issue of fragmentation due to pinned pages, e.g., slab cache, > admittedly a rarer problem. Perhaps mitigated if you use the same technology as you are using to do the freeing, to ensure that pinned pages (slab cache etc.) are preferentially allocated next to other pinned pages. -- Alex Bligh - 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/