lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jun]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateSat, 28 Jun 2003 17:34:05 -0700
From"Martin J. Bligh" <>
SubjectRe: 2.5.73-mm2
--Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote (on Saturday, June 28, 2003 17:08:37 +0100):

> On Sat, Jun 28, 2003 at 08:54:36AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> +config HIGHPMD
>> +	bool "Allocate 2nd-level pagetables from highmem"
>> +	depends on HIGHMEM64G
>> +	help
>> +	  The VM uses one pmd entry for each pagetable page of physical
>> +	  memory allocated. For systems with extreme amounts of highmem,
>> +	  this cannot be tolerated. Setting this option will put
>> +	  userspace 2nd-level pagetables in highmem.
> 
> Does this make sense for !HIGHPTE?  In fact does it make sense to
> carry along HIGHPTE as an option still? ..

Last time I measured it, it had about a 10% overhead in kernel time.
Seems like a good thing to keep as an option to me. Bill said he
had some other code to alleviate the overhead, but I don't think
it's merged ... I'd rather see UKVA (permanently map the pagetables
on a per-process basis) merged before it becomes "not an option" -
that gets rid of all the kmapping.

M.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [from the cache]
©2003-2008