Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | RE: broken VM in 2.4.10-pre9 | Date | Mon, 17 Sep 2001 10:40:45 -0500 | From | "Rob Fuller" <> |
| |
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 [mailto:riel@conectiva.com.br] > Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 7:13 AM > To: Eric W. Biederman > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-mm@kvack.org > Subject: Re: broken VM in 2.4.10-pre9 > > > On 17 Sep 2001, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
<snip>
> > 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 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/
|  |