| Date | Thu, 27 Feb 2014 13:59:59 -0800 | From | Dave Hansen <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHv3 1/2] mm: introduce vm_ops->map_pages() |
| |
On 02/27/2014 11:53 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > +#define FAULT_AROUND_ORDER 4 > +#define FAULT_AROUND_PAGES (1UL << FAULT_AROUND_ORDER) > +#define FAULT_AROUND_MASK ~((1UL << (PAGE_SHIFT + FAULT_AROUND_ORDER)) - 1)
Looking at the performance data made me think of this: do we really want this to be static? It seems like the kind of thing that will cause a regression _somewhere_.
Also, the folks with larger base bage sizes probably don't want a FAULT_AROUND_ORDER=4. That's 1MB of fault-around for ppc64, for example.
|