> > A more compelling description of why this problem needs addressing > > would help things along. > > Oh my. It's probably not too useful for desktops, where such large > mlocks are hopefully uncommon. > > At google we have many applications that serve data from memory and > don't want to allow for disk latencies. Some of the simpler ones use > mlock (though there are other ways - anon memory running with swap > disabled is a surprisingly popular choice). > > Kosaki is also showing interest in mlock, though I'm not sure what his > use case is. I don't have any solid use case. Usually server app only do mlock anonymous memory. But, I haven't found any negative effect in your proposal, therefore I hope to help your effort as I always do when the proposal don't have negative impact. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>