Re: Dirty/Access bits vs. page content

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

 



On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Oh, absolutely. I wasn't arguing it didn't need it. I was merely
> pointing out that if one was to add to Linus' patch such that we'd only
> do the force_flush for mapping_cap_account_dirty() we wouldn't need
> extra things to deal with shmem.

I think we can certainly add that check if we find out that it is
indeed a performance problem. I *could* imagine loads where people
mmap/munmap shmem regions at a high rate, but don't actually know of
any (remember: for this to matter they also have to dirty the pages).

In the absence of such knowledge, I'd rather not make things more
complex than they already are.

              Linus

--
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>




[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]