Re: [PATCH 2/6] mempolicy: Kill all mempolicy sharing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 02:41:22PM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2012, kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> > refcount will be decreased even though was not increased whenever alloc_page_vma()
> > is called. As you know, mere mbind(MPOL_MF_MOVE) calls alloc_page_vma().
> 
> Most of these issues are about memory migration and shared memory. If we
> exempt shared memory from memory migration (after all that shared memory
> has its own distinct memory policies already!) then a lot of these issues
> wont arise.

Soft memory offlining needs migration. It's fairly important that this
works: on the database systems most memory is in shared memory and they
have a lot of memory, so predictive failure analysis and soft offlining
helps a lot.

Classic migration is probably not too important here, but they pretty
much rely on the same low level mechanism.

-Andi

-- 
ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only.

--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]