lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: The IBM order relaxation patch


--On Thursday, 07 February, 2002 3:12 PM +0100 Daniel Phillips
<phillips@bonn-fries.net> wrote:

> Maybe Rik's
>> rmap method could help here, because with reverse mappings we
>> can at least try to free adjacent areas (because we then at least
>> *know* who's using the pages).
>
> Yes, that's one of leading reasons for wanting rmap. (Number one and two
> reasons are: allow forcible unmapping of multiply referenced pages for
> swapout; get more reliable hardware ref bit readings.)
>
> Note that even if we can do forcible freeing we still have to deal with
> the issue of fragmentation due to pinned pages, e.g., slab cache,
> admittedly a rarer problem.

Perhaps mitigated if you use the same technology as you are using to do the
freeing, to ensure that pinned pages (slab cache etc.) are preferentially
allocated next to other pinned pages.

--
Alex Bligh
-
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: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.139 / U:0.648 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site