lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] recognize MAP_LOCKED in mmap() call
    From
    Date

    Andrew Morton wrote:
    >(SuS really only anticipates that mmap needs to look at prior mlocks
    >in force against the address range. It also says
    >
    > Process memory locking does apply to shared memory regions,
    >
    >and we don't do that either. I think we should; can't see why SuS
    >requires this.)

    Let me make sure I read what you said correctly. Does this mean that Linux
    2.4 (or 2.5) kernels do not lock shared memory regions if a process uses
    mlockall?

    If not, that is *really bad* for our real time applications. We don't want
    to take a page fault while running some 80hz task, just because some
    non-real time application tried to use what little physical memory we allow
    for the kernel and all other applications.

    I asked a related question about a week ago on linux-mm and didn't get a
    response. Basically, I was concerned that top did not show RSS == Size when
    mlockall(MCL_CURRENT|MCL_FUTURE) was called. Could this explain the
    difference or is there something else that I'm missing here?

    Thanks.
    --Mark H Johnson
    <mailto:Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com>



    -
    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:0.021 / U:0.388 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site