On 04/14/2013 12:42 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
Hi KOSAKI,
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:01:11AM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
and adding new syscall invokation is unwelcome.
Sure. But one more system call could be cheaper than page-granuarity
operation on purged range.
I don't think
On 04/14/2013 12:42 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
Hi KOSAKI,
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:01:11AM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
and adding new syscall invokation is unwelcome.
Sure. But one more system call could be cheaper than page-granuarity
operation on purged range.
I don't think
Hi KOSAKI,
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:01:11AM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> and adding new syscall invokation is unwelcome.
> >>>
> >>> Sure. But one more system call could be cheaper than page-granuarity
> >>> operation on purged range.
> >>
> >> I don't think vrange(VOLATILE) cost is the
Hi KOSAKI,
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:01:11AM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
and adding new syscall invokation is unwelcome.
Sure. But one more system call could be cheaper than page-granuarity
operation on purged range.
I don't think vrange(VOLATILE) cost is the related of this
and adding new syscall invokation is unwelcome.
>>>
>>> Sure. But one more system call could be cheaper than page-granuarity
>>> operation on purged range.
>>
>> I don't think vrange(VOLATILE) cost is the related of this discusstion.
>> Whether sending SIGBUS or just nuke pte, purge should be
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 04:15:40AM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> (4/11/13 4:02 AM), Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 03:20:30AM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > DONTNEED makes sure user always can see zero-fill pages after
> > he calls madvise while vrange can see data
(4/11/13 4:02 AM), Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 03:20:30AM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> DONTNEED makes sure user always can see zero-fill pages after
> he calls madvise while vrange can see data or encounter SIGBUS.
For replacing DONTNEED, user want to
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 03:20:30AM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> >>> DONTNEED makes sure user always can see zero-fill pages after
> >>> he calls madvise while vrange can see data or encounter SIGBUS.
> >>
> >> For replacing DONTNEED, user want to zero-fill pages like DONTNEED
> >> instead
>>> DONTNEED makes sure user always can see zero-fill pages after
>>> he calls madvise while vrange can see data or encounter SIGBUS.
>>
>> For replacing DONTNEED, user want to zero-fill pages like DONTNEED
>> instead of SIGBUS. So, new flag option would be nice.
>
> If userspace people want
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 04:22:58PM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> (3/12/13 3:38 AM), Minchan Kim wrote:
> > First of all, let's define the term.
> > From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
> > for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please suggest.
> >
> >
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 04:22:58PM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
(3/12/13 3:38 AM), Minchan Kim wrote:
First of all, let's define the term.
From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please suggest.
This
DONTNEED makes sure user always can see zero-fill pages after
he calls madvise while vrange can see data or encounter SIGBUS.
For replacing DONTNEED, user want to zero-fill pages like DONTNEED
instead of SIGBUS. So, new flag option would be nice.
If userspace people want it, I can do
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 03:20:30AM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
DONTNEED makes sure user always can see zero-fill pages after
he calls madvise while vrange can see data or encounter SIGBUS.
For replacing DONTNEED, user want to zero-fill pages like DONTNEED
instead of SIGBUS. So, new
(4/11/13 4:02 AM), Minchan Kim wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 03:20:30AM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
DONTNEED makes sure user always can see zero-fill pages after
he calls madvise while vrange can see data or encounter SIGBUS.
For replacing DONTNEED, user want to zero-fill pages like
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 04:15:40AM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
(4/11/13 4:02 AM), Minchan Kim wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 03:20:30AM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
DONTNEED makes sure user always can see zero-fill pages after
he calls madvise while vrange can see data or encounter
and adding new syscall invokation is unwelcome.
Sure. But one more system call could be cheaper than page-granuarity
operation on purged range.
I don't think vrange(VOLATILE) cost is the related of this discusstion.
Whether sending SIGBUS or just nuke pte, purge should be done on vmscan,
(3/12/13 3:38 AM), Minchan Kim wrote:
> First of all, let's define the term.
> From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
> for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please suggest.
>
> This version is still *RFC* because it's just quick prototype so
> it
(3/12/13 3:38 AM), Minchan Kim wrote:
First of all, let's define the term.
From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please suggest.
This version is still *RFC* because it's just quick prototype so
it doesn't
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 05:05:17PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 03/27/2013 01:03 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> >On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 05:26:04PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> >>Sorting out how to handle vrange() calls that cross both anonymous
> >>and file vmas will be interesting, and may have some
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 05:05:17PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
On 03/27/2013 01:03 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 05:26:04PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
Sorting out how to handle vrange() calls that cross both anonymous
and file vmas will be interesting, and may have some of the
On 03/27/2013 01:03 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 05:26:04PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
Sorting out how to handle vrange() calls that cross both anonymous
and file vmas will be interesting, and may have some of the
drawbacks of the vma based approach, but I think it will still
On 03/27/2013 01:03 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 05:26:04PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
Sorting out how to handle vrange() calls that cross both anonymous
and file vmas will be interesting, and may have some of the
drawbacks of the vma based approach, but I think it will still
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 05:26:04PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 03/25/2013 01:42 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> >On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:06:56AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> >>So, if I understand you properly, its more an issue of the the
> >>added cost of making the purged range non-volatile, and
>
Hi Bart,
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 06:16:16PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tuesday 12 March 2013 08:38:24 Minchan Kim wrote:
> > First of all, let's define the term.
> > From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
> > for anonymous page. If you have
Hi Bart,
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 06:16:16PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
Hi,
On Tuesday 12 March 2013 08:38:24 Minchan Kim wrote:
First of all, let's define the term.
From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
for anonymous page. If you have a better
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 05:26:04PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
On 03/25/2013 01:42 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:06:56AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
So, if I understand you properly, its more an issue of the the
added cost of making the purged range non-volatile, and
On 03/25/2013 01:42 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:06:56AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
So, if I understand you properly, its more an issue of the the added
cost of making the purged range non-volatile, and re-faulting in the
pages if we purge them all, when we didn't actually
On 03/25/2013 01:42 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:06:56AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
So, if I understand you properly, its more an issue of the the added
cost of making the purged range non-volatile, and re-faulting in the
pages if we purge them all, when we didn't actually
Hi,
On Tuesday 12 March 2013 08:38:24 Minchan Kim wrote:
> First of all, let's define the term.
> From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
> for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please suggest.
>
> This version is still *RFC* because it's just quick
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:06:56AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 03/21/2013 11:01 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> >On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 06:29:38PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> >>On 03/12/2013 12:38 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> >>>First of all, let's define the term.
> >>> From now on, I'd like to call it
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:06:56AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
On 03/21/2013 11:01 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 06:29:38PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
On 03/12/2013 12:38 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
First of all, let's define the term.
From now on, I'd like to call it as
Hi,
On Tuesday 12 March 2013 08:38:24 Minchan Kim wrote:
First of all, let's define the term.
From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please suggest.
This version is still *RFC* because it's just quick
On 03/21/2013 11:01 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 06:29:38PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
On 03/12/2013 12:38 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
First of all, let's define the term.
From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
for anonymous page. If you have a better
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 06:29:38PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 03/12/2013 12:38 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> >First of all, let's define the term.
> > From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
> >for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please suggest.
> >
>
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 06:29:38PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
On 03/12/2013 12:38 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
First of all, let's define the term.
From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please suggest.
This version
On 03/21/2013 11:01 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 06:29:38PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
On 03/12/2013 12:38 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
First of all, let's define the term.
From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
for anonymous page. If you have a better
On 03/12/2013 12:38 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
First of all, let's define the term.
From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please suggest.
This version is still *RFC* because it's just quick prototype so
it doesn't
On 03/12/2013 12:38 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
First of all, let's define the term.
From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please suggest.
This version is still *RFC* because it's just quick prototype so
it doesn't
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 04:16:57PM -0700, Paul Turner wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:38 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > First of all, let's define the term.
> > From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
> > for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 04:16:57PM -0700, Paul Turner wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:38 AM, Minchan Kim minc...@kernel.org wrote:
First of all, let's define the term.
From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind,
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:38 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> First of all, let's define the term.
> From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
> for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please suggest.
>
> This version is still *RFC* because it's just quick prototype
First of all, let's define the term.
>From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please suggest.
This version is still *RFC* because it's just quick prototype so
it doesn't support THP/HugeTLB/KSM and even couldn't build
First of all, let's define the term.
From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please suggest.
This version is still *RFC* because it's just quick prototype so
it doesn't support THP/HugeTLB/KSM and even couldn't build
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:38 AM, Minchan Kim minc...@kernel.org wrote:
First of all, let's define the term.
From now on, I'd like to call it as vrange(a.k.a volatile range)
for anonymous page. If you have a better name in mind, please suggest.
This version is still *RFC* because it's just
44 matches
Mail list logo
