On 26.04.24 23:58, Peter Xu wrote:
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 11:33:08PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
I raised this topic in the past, and IMHO we either (a) never should have
added COW support; or (b) added COW support by using ordinary anonymous
memory (hey, partial mappings of hugetlb pages!
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 11:33:08PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> I raised this topic in the past, and IMHO we either (a) never should have
> added COW support; or (b) added COW support by using ordinary anonymous
> memory (hey, partial mappings of hugetlb pages! ;) ).
>
> After all, COW is an
Hmm, so when I enable 2M hugetlb I found ./cow is even failing on x86.
# ./cow | grep -B1 "not ok"
# [RUN] vmsplice() + unmap in child ... with hugetlb (2048 kB)
not ok 161 No leak from parent into child
--
# [RUN] vmsplice() + unmap in child with mprotect() optimization
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 07:28:31PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 26.04.24 18:12, Peter Xu wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 09:44:58AM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 09:17:47AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > > On 02.04.24 14:55, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > >
On 26.04.24 18:12, Peter Xu wrote:
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 09:44:58AM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 09:17:47AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 02.04.24 14:55, David Hildenbrand wrote:
Let's consistently call the "fast-only" part of GUP "GUP-fast" and rename
all relevant
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 09:44:58AM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 09:17:47AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > On 02.04.24 14:55, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > Let's consistently call the "fast-only" part of GUP "GUP-fast" and rename
> > > all relevant internal functions to
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 09:17:47AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 02.04.24 14:55, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > Let's consistently call the "fast-only" part of GUP "GUP-fast" and rename
> > all relevant internal functions to start with "gup_fast", to make it
> > clearer that this is not
On 02.04.24 14:55, David Hildenbrand wrote:
Let's consistently call the "fast-only" part of GUP "GUP-fast" and rename
all relevant internal functions to start with "gup_fast", to make it
clearer that this is not ordinary GUP. The current mixture of
"lockless", "gup" and "gup_fast" is confusing.
On 4/2/24 5:55 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
Let's consistently call the "fast-only" part of GUP "GUP-fast" and rename
all relevant internal functions to start with "gup_fast", to make it
clearer that this is not ordinary GUP. The current mixture of
"lockless", "gup" and "gup_fast" is confusing.
Let's consistently call the "fast-only" part of GUP "GUP-fast" and rename
all relevant internal functions to start with "gup_fast", to make it
clearer that this is not ordinary GUP. The current mixture of
"lockless", "gup" and "gup_fast" is confusing.
Further, avoid the term "huge" when talking
10 matches
Mail list logo