[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFwMVjsYpT+c0GukgU18_YEKKWtXVpOk0ePRAtCDU71jqA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 17:12:24 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Linux-X86 <x86@...nel.org>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
Steven Noonan <steven@...inklabs.net>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Use an alternative to _PAGE_PROTNONE for
_PAGE_NUMA v2
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 4:34 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
>
> How painful would it be to get rid of _PAGE_NUMA entirely? Page bits
> are a highly precious commodity and saving one would be valuable.
I don't think _PAGE_NUMA is a problem. It's only set when the page is
not present, so we have tons of bits then.
Now, that's still inconvenient for the 32-bit pte case, because we do
*not* have tons of bits for non-present cases since we need them for
the swap indexes.
This is different from _PAGE_SOFT_DIRTY, which we do need for both
present and swapped-out entries.
Or am I missing something?
Linus
--
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