lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Apr]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Use an alternative to _PAGE_PROTNONE for _PAGE_NUMA v2
On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 07:30:31PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 05:46:52PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > Someone will ask why automatic NUMA balancing hints do not use "real"
> > PROT_NONE but as it would need VMA information to do that on all
> > architectures it would mean that VMA-fixups would be required when marking
> > PTEs for NUMA hinting faults so would be expensive.
>
> Like this:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/13/431
>
> That used the generic PROT_NONE infrastructure and compared, on fault,
> the page protection bits against the vma->vm_page_prot bits?
>
> So the objection to that approach was the vma-> dereference in
> pte_numa() ?

Peter, I somehow missing, with this patch would it be possible to
get rid of ugly macros in 2 level pages like we have now? (I've
dropped off softdirty support for non x86-64 now [patches are
flying around]) but still there are a few remains which make
Linus unhappy.

static __always_inline pgoff_t pte_to_pgoff(pte_t pte)
{
return (pgoff_t)
(pte_bitop(pte.pte_low, PTE_FILE_SHIFT1, PTE_FILE_MASK1, 0) +
pte_bitop(pte.pte_low, PTE_FILE_SHIFT2, PTE_FILE_MASK2, PTE_FILE_LSHIFT2) +
pte_bitop(pte.pte_low, PTE_FILE_SHIFT3, -1UL, PTE_FILE_LSHIFT3));
}


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-04-08 21:01    [W:0.093 / U:10.052 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site