--On Thursday, September 01, 2005 18:58:23 -0700 "Chen, Kenneth W"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> +prio_tree_iter_init(&iter, &mapping->i_mmap,
>> +vma->vm_start, vma->vm_end);
>
>
> I think this is a bug. The radix priority tree for address_space->
>
Dave McCracken wrote on Tuesday, August 30, 2005 3:13 PM
> This patch implements page table sharing for all shared memory regions that
> span an entire page table page. It supports sharing at multiple page
> levels, depending on the architecture.
In function pt_share_pte():
> + while
Dave McCracken wrote on Tuesday, August 30, 2005 3:13 PM
> This patch implements page table sharing for all shared memory regions that
> span an entire page table page. It supports sharing at multiple page
> levels, depending on the architecture.
>
>
> This version of the patch supports i386 and
--On Wednesday, August 31, 2005 12:44:24 +0100 Hugh Dickins
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So you don't have Nick's test at the start of copy_page_range():
> if (!(vma->vm_flags & (VM_HUGETLB|VM_NONLINEAR|VM_RESERVED))) {
> if (!vma->anon_vma)
> return 0;
>
>> They're incompatible, but you could be left to choose one or the other
>> via config option.
>
> Wouldn't need config option: there's /proc/sys/kernel/randomize_va_space
> for the whole running system, compatibility check on the ELFs run, and
> the infinite stack rlimit: enough ways to suppress
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> --Hugh Dickins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote (on Wednesday, August 31, 2005
> 14:42:38 +0100):
> >
> > Which is indeed a further disincentive against shared page tables.
>
> Or shared pagetables a disincentive to randomizing the mmap space ;-)
Fair poin
> > Which is indeed a further disincentive against shared page tables.
>
> Or shared pagetables a disincentive to randomizing the mmap space ;-)
> They're incompatible, but you could be left to choose one or the other
> via config option.
>
> 3% on "a certain industry-standard database benchmark
--Hugh Dickins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote (on Wednesday, August 31, 2005
14:42:38 +0100):
> On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 12:44 +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>> > I was going to say, doesn't randomize_va_space take away the rest of
>> > the point? But no, it a
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 12:44 +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > I was going to say, doesn't randomize_va_space take away the rest of
> > the point? But no, it appears "randomize_va_space", as it currently
> > appears in mainline anyway, is somewhat an exag
On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 12:44 +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> I was going to say, doesn't randomize_va_space take away the rest of
> the point? But no, it appears "randomize_va_space", as it currently
> appears in mainline anyway, is somewhat an exaggeration: it just shifts
> the stack a little, with n
On Tue, 30 Aug 2005, Dave McCracken wrote:
>
> This patch implements page table sharing for all shared memory regions that
> span an entire page table page. It supports sharing at multiple page
> levels, depending on the architecture.
>
> Performance testing has shown no degradation with this pa
11 matches
Mail list logo
