On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi all, > > I mentioned at LSF/MM that I wanted to revive this, and at the time there were > no disagreements. > > I finally got around to refreshing the patch(es) so here goes. > > These patches introduce VM_PINNED infrastructure, vma tracking of persistent > 'pinned' page ranges. Pinned is anything that has a fixed phys address (as > required for say IO DMA engines) and thus cannot use the weaker VM_LOCKED. One > popular way to pin pages is through get_user_pages() but that not nessecarily > the only way. Lol, this looks like resurrection of VM_RESERVED which I've removed not so long time ago. Maybe single-bit state isn't flexible enought? This supposed to supports pinning only by one user and only in its own mm? This might be done as extension of existing memory-policy engine. It allows to keep vm_area_struct slim in normal cases and change behaviour when needed. memory-policy might hold reference-counter of "pinners", track ownership and so on. > > Roland, as said, I need some IB assistance, see patches 4 and 5, where I got > lost in the qib and ipath code. > > Patches 1-3 compile tested. > > -- > 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> -- 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>