Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753705Ab2JUN31 (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Oct 2012 09:29:27 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com ([209.85.212.178]:61226 "EHLO mail-wi0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753437Ab2JUN30 (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Oct 2012 09:29:26 -0400 Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 15:29:21 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Rik van Riel Cc: Peter Zijlstra , mingo@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aarcange@redhat.com, Michel Lespinasse Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/2] numa, mm: Rename the PROT_NONE fault handling functions Message-ID: <20121021132921.GA23425@gmail.com> References: <20121018171821.7f1b1683@cuia.bos.redhat.com> <20121018172021.0b1f6e3d@cuia.bos.redhat.com> <1350646863.30157.13.camel@twins> <50815EA5.5080502@redhat.com> <20121019205407.GA9132@gmail.com> <20121021125007.GB19535@gmail.com> <5083F720.2030003@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5083F720.2030003@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1607 Lines: 49 * Rik van Riel wrote: > On 10/21/2012 08:50 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > >* Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > >>>>I don't much care either way, but I was thinking walken > >>>>might want to use something similar to do WSS estimation, > >>>>in which case the NUMA name is just as wrong. > >>> > >>>That's a good point. I had not considered other uses of the > >>>same code. > >> > >>Renaming the functions for more clarity still makes sense IMO: > >>we could give it a _wss or _working_set prefix/postfix? > > > >So, to not drop your patch on the floor I've modified it as per > >the patch below. > > > >The _wss() names signal that these handlers are used for a > >specific purpose, they are not related to the regular PROT_NONE > >handling code. > > Michel indicated that he does not use PROT_NONE for his > working set estimation code, but instead checks the accessed > bits in the page tables. The pte_young() WSS method has a couple of fundamental limitations: - it doesn't work with shared memory very well, the pte is per mapping, not per page. The PROT_NONE method instruments the physical page in essence. - it does not tell us which task touched the pte, in a multi-threaded program So like Peter I'd too expect these new WSS methods to eventually be picked up for any serious WSS work. Thanks, Ingo -- 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/