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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans