[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <00000139458826d2-f72fceae-338d-4f6c-84f3-67d8817ece99-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 19:35:14 +0000
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] mempolicy: Remove mempolicy sharing
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012, Mel Gorman wrote:
> Ideally, the shared policy handling would be rewritten to either properly
> handle COW of the policy structures or at least reference count MPOL_F_SHARED
> based exclusively on information within the policy. However, this patch takes
> the easier approach of disabling any policy sharing between VMAs. Each new
> range allocated with sp_alloc will allocate a new policy, set the reference
> count to 1 and drop the reference count of the old policy. This increases
> the memory footprint but is not expected to be a major problem as mbind()
> is unlikely to be used for fine-grained ranges. It is also inefficient
> because it means we allocate a new policy even in cases where mbind_range()
> could use the new_policy passed to it. However, it is more straight-forward
> and the change should be invisible to the user.
Hmmm. I dont like the additional memory use but this is definitely an
issue that needs addressing.
Reviewed-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
--
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