lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH][0/8] (Targeting 2.6.17) Posix memory locking and balanced mlock-LRU semantic
    I will check and fix it.

    2006/3/20, Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>:
    > On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Stone Wang wrote:
    >
    > > 2. More consistent LRU semantics in Memory Management.
    > > Mlocked pages is placed on a separate LRU list: Wired List.
    > > The pages dont take part in LRU algorithms,for they could never be swapped,
    > > until munlocked.
    >
    > This also implies that dirty bits of the pte for mlocked pages are never
    > checked.
    >
    > Currently light swapping (which is very common) will scan over all pages
    > and move the dirty bits from the pte into struct page. This may take
    > awhile but at least at some point we will write out dirtied pages.
    >
    > The result of not scanning mlocked pages will be that mmapped files will
    > not be updated unless either the process terminates or msync() is called.
    >
    >
    -
    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: 2006-03-21 06:25    [W:0.021 / U:0.212 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site