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.
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
6 matches
Mail list logo
