On Wed 27-09-17 13:51:09, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> On 2017/9/26 19:00, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > 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);
> > }
> >
>
> Hi Michal,
>
> My kernel is v3.10, and I missed this code, thank you reminding me.
I guess I didn't get your answer. Does the above diff resolves your
problem?
--
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>
