Hi all,
Sorry for late interrupting to promote patchset to the mainline.
I'd like to discuss our usecase so I'd like to change per-process
interface with per-range interface.
Our usecase is following as,
A application allocates a big buffer(A) and makes backup buffer(B)
for it and copy B from A.
Let's assume A consists of subranges (A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4).
As time goes by, application can modify anywhere of A.
In this example, let's assume A-1 and A-2 are modified.
When the time happen, we compare A-1 with B-1 to make
diff of the range(On every iteration, we don't need all range's diff by design)
and do something with diff, then we'd like to remark only the A-1 with
soft-dirty, NOT A's all range of the process to track the A-1's
further difference in future while keeping dirty information (A-2, A-3, A-4)
because we will make A-2's diff in next iteration.
We can't do it by existing interface.
So, I'd like to add [addr, len] argument with using proc
echo 4 0x100000 0x3000 > /proc/self/clear_refs
It doesn't break anything but not sure everyone like the interface
because recently I heard from akpm following comment.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/5/21/529
Although per-process reclaim is another story with this,
I feel he seems to hate doing something on proc interface with
/proc/pid/maps like above range parameter.
If it's not allowed, another approach should be new system call.
int sys_softdirty(pid_t pid, void *addr, size_t len);
If we approach new system call, we don't need to maintain current
proc interface and it would be very handy to get a information
without pagemap (open/read/close) so we can add a parameter to
get a dirty information easily.
int sys_softdirty(pid_t pid, void *addr, size_t len, unsigned char *vec)
What do you think about it?
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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>