[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150820170309.GA11557@akamai.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 13:03:09 -0400
From: Eric B Munson <emunson@...mai.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/6] mm: Introduce VM_LOCKONFAULT
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 19-08-15 17:33:45, Eric B Munson wrote:
> [...]
> > The group which asked for this feature here
> > wants the ability to distinguish between LOCKED and LOCKONFAULT regions
> > and without the VMA flag there isn't a way to do that.
>
> Could you be more specific on why this is needed?
They want to keep metrics on the amount of memory used in a LOCKONFAULT
region versus the address space of the region.
>
> > Do we know that these last two open flags are needed right now or is
> > this speculation that they will be and that none of the other VMA flags
> > can be reclaimed?
>
> I do not think they are needed by anybody right now but that is not a
> reason why it should be used without a really strong justification.
> If the discoverability is really needed then fair enough but I haven't
> seen any justification for that yet.
To be completely clear you believe that if the metrics collection is
not a strong enough justification, it is better to expand the mm_struct
by another unsigned long than to use one of these bits right?
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists