Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Re : vm: weird behaviour when munmapping | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Date | Fri, 17 Nov 2006 15:21:08 +0100 |
| |
On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 14:12 +0000, moreau francis wrote: > Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > No indeed. You seem confused with remaining and new. > > > > It has one VMA (A) it needs to split that into two pieces, it happens to > > do it like (B,A') where A' is the old VMA object with new a start > > address, and B is a new VMA object. > > Is there any rules to decide which VMA is the new one ?
The new object is the one allocated using: new = kmem_cache_alloc(vm_area_cachep, SLAB_KERNEL);
> From what you wrote it seems that we call B the new object because > it has a new end address...
No, because its newly allocated.
> From my point of view, I called B the old VMA simply because it's > going to be destroyed...
Please read Mel Gorman's book on memory management to gain a better understanding.
http://www.phptr.com/bookstore/product.asp?isbn=0131453483&rl=1
- 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/
| |