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 vrange(VOLATILE)
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
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 zero-
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
>>> 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 i
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.
> >
> >
(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 o
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 be
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 a
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 h
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 prot
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 a
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 name
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.
> >
> >Thi
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 sup
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 sugges
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
22 matches
Mail list logo