[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:0.023 / U:41.692 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site