On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 12:11:19 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:49:03 +0900 > Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:23:01 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > SHARED mapped file cache is not moved by patch [1/2] ??? > > > It sounds strange. > > > > > hmm, I'm sorry I'm not so good at user applications, but is it usual to use > > VM_SHARED file caches(!tmpfs) ? > > And is it better for us to move them only when page_mapcount() == 1 ? > > > > Considering shared library which has only one user, moving MAP_SHARED makes sense. > Unfortunately, there are people who creates their own shared library just for > their private dlopen() etc. (shared library for private use...) > > So, I think moving MAP_SHARED files makes sense. > Thank you for your explanations. I'll update my patches to allow to move MAP_SHARED(but page_mapcount() == 1) file caches, and resend. Thanks, Daisuke Nishimura. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>