[lkml]   [2004]   [Feb]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Active Memory Defragmentation: Our implementation & problems

--- Dave Hansen <> wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-02-04 at 10:54, Alok Mooley wrote:
> > --- Dave Hansen <> wrote:
> Depending on the quantity of work that you're trying
> to do at once, this
> might be unavoidable.
> I know it's a difficult thing to think about, but I
> still don't
> understand the precise cases that you're concerned
> about. Page faults
> to me seem like the least of your problems. A
> bigger issue would be if
> the page is written to by userspace after you copy,
> but before you
> install the new pte. Did I miss the code in your
> patch that invalidated
> the old tlb entries?

This is a non issue for us right now, since we update
the ptes in a lock, & so no one can access it before
it is completely updated. Yes, we invalidate the old
tlb entries as well as the cache entries as reqd. on
some other architectures.


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:00    [W:0.091 / U:2.404 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site