On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I guess the real question is not whether it's useful, I think it clearly
> is. The question should be: are there real downsides? Does the addition to
> the anon mmap field blow up the size of vma_struct by a pointer, or is
> there still space?
No, it's part of an union of 'struct vma_struct' in the current implementation
so the size doesn't change.
I'd still like to see something that's not restricted to page aligned memory
areas, though.
Pekka
--
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>