[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0000013eebefddd4-ace0f251-cfba-41cf-b48e-266cb13bcebd-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 16:19:25 +0000
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>
cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
trinity@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Roland Dreier <roland@...nel.org>, infinipath@...gic.com,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] mm: Fix RLIMIT_MEMLOCK
On Sat, 25 May 2013, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> If pinned and mlocked are totally difference intentionally, why IB uses
> RLIMIT_MEMLOCK. Why don't IB uses IB specific limit and why only IB raise up
> number of pinned pages and other gup users don't.
> I can't guess IB folk's intent.
True another limit would be better. The reason that IB raises the
pinned pages is because IB permanently pins those pages. Other users of
gup do that temporarily.
If there are other users that pin pages permanently should also account
for it.
--
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