lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [May]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [openib-general] Re: [PATCH][RFC][0/4] InfiniBand userspace verbs implementation
On Wed, 11 May 2005, William Jordan wrote:
> On 5/7/05, Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com> wrote:
> > > My understanding is that mlock() could in theory allow the page to be moved,
> > > but that currently nothing in the kernel would actually move it. However,
> > > that could change in the future to allow hot-swapping of RAM.
> >
> > That's my understanding too, that nothing currently does so. Aside from
> > hot-swapping RAM, there's also a need to be able to migrate pages around
> > RAM, either to unfragment memory allowing higher-order allocations to
> > succeed more often, or to get around extreme dmamem/normal-mem/highmem
> > imbalances without dedicating huge reserves. Those would more often
> > succeed if uninhibited by mlock.
>
> If I am reading you correctly, you are saying that mlock currently
> prevents pages from migrating around to unfragment memory, but
> get_user_pages does not prevent this?

No, not what I meant at all. I'm saying that currently (aside from
proposed patches) there is no such migration of pages; that we'd prefer
to implement migration in such a way that mlock does not inhibit it
(though there might prove to be strong arguments defeating that);
and that get_user_pages _must_ prevent migration (and if there
were already such migration, I'd be saying it _does_ prevent it).

Hugh
-
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: 2005-05-11 22:47    [W:0.559 / U:0.364 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site