Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 16 Apr 2004 16:15:42 +1000 | From | 'David Gibson' <> | Subject | Re: hugetlb demand paging patch part [2/3] |
| |
On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 10:56:14PM -0700, Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > David Gibson wrote on Thursday, April 15, 2004 9:49 PM > > > > If we could get rid of follow_hugetlb_pages() it would remove an ugly > > > > function from every arch, which would be nice. > > > > > > I hope the goal here is not to trim code for existing prefaulting scheme. > > > That function has to go for demand paging, and demand paging comes with > > > a performance price most people don't realize. If the goal here is to > > > make the code prettier, I vote against that. > > > > Well, I'm attempting to understand the hugepage code across all the > > archs, so that I can try to implement copy-on-write with a minimum of > > arch specific gunk. Simplifying and consolidating the existing code > > across archs would be a helpful first step, if possible. > > Looks like everyone has their own agenda, COW is related to demand paging, > and has it's own set of characteristics to deal with. I would hope do one > thing at a time.
Which is why I've attempted to factor things out of your patches which don't appear to be inherent to demand paging. Consolidating the existing hugepage code will make both demand-paging and COW patches much more palatable.
-- David Gibson | For every complex problem there is a david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | solution which is simple, neat and | wrong. http://www.ozlabs.org/people/dgibson - 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/
| |