Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 15 Apr 2004 16:08:51 +0200 | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: Benchmarking objrmap under memory pressure |
| |
On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 02:45:21PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote: > I like file vma merging, but I am puzzled why we (you) bothered > to implement anon vma merging before and not file vma merging, > if the file vma merging is so much more important. I suppose > it's something you learnt later, or the apps evolved.
both things, I learnt it later, but it's also because the anon-vma pretty much "forced" me not to be lazy about the inodes ;). It's something I planned already when I changed the mmap mering to handle inodes too and submitted to Andrew that merged it in 2.5 mainline, the only reason I didn't do it at that time, is that it was originally developed for 2.4, and the less changes the better, so at that time I only fixed the showstopper inode-merging for mmap and not mprotect.
At 2.4 time I also planned eventually to add the vma merging to mlock but it didn't happen yet ;).
> Indeed. If anonmm does live on, I would want to add the file > vma merging; but when things (mpol, prio_tree, i_shared locking) > have settled down rather than now - we've lived without it for > some years, can live without it for a few weeks more.
Sure. - 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/
| |