On Tue 26-09-17 11:45:16, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 09/26/2017 11:22 AM, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> > On 2017/9/26 17:13, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> >>> This is still very fuzzy. What are you actually trying to achieve?
> >>
> >> I don't expect page fault any more after mlock.
> >>
> >
> > Our apps is some thing like RT, and page-fault maybe cause a lot of time,
> > e.g. lock, mem reclaim ..., so I use mlock and don't want page fault
> > any more.
>
> Why does your app then have restricted mprotect when calling mlockall()
> and only later adjusts the mprotect?
Ahh, OK I see what is goging on. So you have PROT_NONE vma at the time
mlockall and then later mprotect it something else and want to fault all
that memory at the mprotect time?
So basically to do
---
diff --git a/mm/mprotect.c b/mm/mprotect.c
index 6d3e2f082290..b665b5d1c544 100644
--- a/mm/mprotect.c
+++ b/mm/mprotect.c
@@ -369,7 +369,7 @@ mprotect_fixup(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct vm_area_struct **pprev,
* Private VM_LOCKED VMA becoming writable: trigger COW to avoid major
* fault on access.
*/
- if ((oldflags & (VM_WRITE | VM_SHARED | VM_LOCKED)) == VM_LOCKED &&
+ if ((oldflags & (VM_WRITE | VM_LOCKED)) == VM_LOCKED &&
(newflags & VM_WRITE)) {
populate_vma_page_range(vma, start, end, NULL);
}
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
