[lkml]   [2001]   [Sep]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRE: broken VM in 2.4.10-pre9
One argument for reverse mappings is distributed shared memory or
distributed file systems and their interaction with memory mapped files.
For example, a distributed file system may need to invalidate a specific
page of a file that may be mapped multiple times on a node.

This may be a naive argument given my limited knowledge of Linux memory
management internals. If so, I will refrain from posting this sort of
thing in the future. Let me know.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rik van Riel []
> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 7:13 AM
> To: Eric W. Biederman
> Cc:;
> Subject: Re: broken VM in 2.4.10-pre9
> On 17 Sep 2001, Eric W. Biederman wrote:


> > Do you have any arguments for the reverse mappings or just
> for some of
> > the other side effects that go along with them?
> Mainly for the side effects, but until somebody comes
> up with another idea to achieve all the side effects I'm
> not giving up on reverse mappings. If you can achieve
> all the good stuff in another way, show it.
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 13:03    [W:0.087 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site