[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48D2EBBB.205@goop.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 17:00:59 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
CC: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
Hugh Dickens <hugh@...itas.com>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Populating multiple ptes at fault time
Avi Kivity wrote:
>> Yes. At worst Linux would underestimate the process RSS a bit
>> (depending on how many unsynchronized ptes you leave lying around). I
>>
>
> Not the RSS (that's pte.present pages) but the working set (aka active
> list).
Yep.
>> bet there's an appropriate pvop hook you could use to force
>> synchronization just before the kernel actually inspects the bits
>> (leaving lazy mode sounds good).
>>
>
> It would have to be a new lazy mode, not the existing one, I think.
The only direct use of pte_young() is in zap_pte_range, within a
mmu_lazy region. So syncing the A bit state on entering lazy mmu mode
would work fine there.
The call via page_referenced_one() doesn't seem to have a very
convenient hook though. Perhaps putting something in
page_check_address() would do the job.
J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists