On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 12:11 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > See, that's great until you start dealing with MAP_SHARED|MAP_ANONYMOUS. > To get that right between children, you end up something very fs-like > when the child needs to fault in a page that is already populated by the > parent. I strongly suspect we end up back at hugetlbfs backing it :/
Yeah, but the case I'm worried about is plain anonymous. We already have the fs to back SHARED|ANONYMOUS, and they're not really anonymous. :) This patch *really* needs anonymous pages, and it kinda shoehorns them in with the filesystem. Stacks aren't shared at all, so this is a perfect example of where we can forget the fs, right? -- Dave _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
