[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1405211945140.13243@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 19:49:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [patch -mm] mm, thp: avoid excessive compaction latency during
fault fix
On Tue, 13 May 2014, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> I wonder what about a process doing e.g. mmap() with MAP_POPULATE. It seems to
> me that it would get only MIGRATE_ASYNC here, right? Since gfp_mask would
> include __GFP_NO_KSWAPD and it won't have PF_KTHREAD.
> I think that goes against the idea that with MAP_POPULATE you say you are
> willing to wait to have everything in place before you actually use the
> memory. So I guess you are also willing to wait for hugepages in that
> situation?
>
I don't understand the distinction you're making between MAP_POPULATE and
simply a prefault of the anon memory. What is the difference in semantics
between using MAP_POPULATE and touching a byte every page size along the
range? In the latter, you'd be faulting thp with MIGRATE_ASYNC, so I
don't understand how MAP_POPULATE is any different or implies any
preference for hugepages.
--
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