On 10/23/19 12:28 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Thu, 24 Oct 2019, Yang Shi wrote:
We have usecase to use tmpfs as QEMU memory backend and we would like to
take the advantage of THP as well. But, our test shows the EPT is not
PMD mapped even though the underlying THP are PMD mapped on host.
We have usecase to use tmpfs as QEMU memory backend and we would like to
take the advantage of THP as well. But, our test shows the EPT is not
PMD mapped even though the underlying THP are PMD mapped on host.
The number showed by /sys/kernel/debug/kvm/largepage is much less than
the number of PMD
On Thu, 24 Oct 2019, Yang Shi wrote:
> We have usecase to use tmpfs as QEMU memory backend and we would like to
> take the advantage of THP as well. But, our test shows the EPT is not
> PMD mapped even though the underlying THP are PMD mapped on host.
> The number showed by
On Wed, 23 Oct 2019, Yang Shi wrote:
> On 10/23/19 10:24 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 01:05:04AM +0800, Yang Shi wrote:
> > > + return map_count >= 0 &&
> > > +map_count == atomic_read([1].compound_mapcount);
> > > }
> > I didn't like Hugh's duplicate definition
On 10/23/19 10:24 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 01:05:04AM +0800, Yang Shi wrote:
+ return map_count >= 0 &&
+ map_count == atomic_read([1].compound_mapcount);
}
I didn't like Hugh's duplicate definition either. May I suggest:
Thanks, Willy. It is
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 01:05:04AM +0800, Yang Shi wrote:
> + return map_count >= 0 &&
> +map_count == atomic_read([1].compound_mapcount);
> }
I didn't like Hugh's duplicate definition either. May I suggest:
diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
index
We have usecase to use tmpfs as QEMU memory backend and we would like to
take the advantage of THP as well. But, our test shows the EPT is not
PMD mapped even though the underlying THP are PMD mapped on host.
The number showed by /sys/kernel/debug/kvm/largepage is much less than
the number of PMD
On 10/22/19 6:31 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Tue, 22 Oct 2019, Yang Shi wrote:
On 10/22/19 3:27 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
I completely agree that the current PageTransCompoundMap() is wrong.
A fix for that is one of many patches I've not yet got to upstreaming.
Comparing yours and mine, I'm
On Tue, 22 Oct 2019, Yang Shi wrote:
> On 10/22/19 3:27 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> >
> > I completely agree that the current PageTransCompoundMap() is wrong.
> >
> > A fix for that is one of many patches I've not yet got to upstreaming.
> > Comparing yours and mine, I'm worried by your use of
On 10/22/19 3:27 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
On Wed, 23 Oct 2019, Yang Shi wrote:
We have usecase to use tmpfs as QEMU memory backend and we would like to
take the advantage of THP as well. But, our test shows the EPT is not
PMD mapped even though the underlying THP are PMD mapped on host.
The
On Wed, 23 Oct 2019, Yang Shi wrote:
> We have usecase to use tmpfs as QEMU memory backend and we would like to
> take the advantage of THP as well. But, our test shows the EPT is not
> PMD mapped even though the underlying THP are PMD mapped on host.
> The number showed by
We have usecase to use tmpfs as QEMU memory backend and we would like to
take the advantage of THP as well. But, our test shows the EPT is not
PMD mapped even though the underlying THP are PMD mapped on host.
The number showed by /sys/kernel/debug/kvm/largepage is much less than
the number of PMD
12 matches
Mail list logo
