[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: hugepage patches
- To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
- Subject: Re: hugepage patches
- From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
- Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 21:50:12 -0800
- Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>, davem@redhat.com,rohit.seth@intel.com, davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com, anton@samba.org,linux-mm@kvack.org
- Fake-Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
- In-Reply-To: <m1hebk1u8g.fsf@frodo.biederman.org>
- Mail-Followup-To: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>,"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>, davem@redhat.com,rohit.seth@intel.com, davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com, anton@samba.org,linux-mm@kvack.org
- Organization: The Domain of Holomorphy
- Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mm-archive@humbolt.geo.uu.nl
- References: <20030131151501.7273a9bf.akpm@digeo.com> <20030202025546.2a29db61.akpm@digeo.com> <20030202195908.GD29981@holomorphy.com> <20030202124943.30ea43b7.akpm@digeo.com> <m1n0ld1jvv.fsf@frodo.biederman.org> <20030203132929.40f0d9c0.akpm@digeo.com> <m1hebk1u8g.fsf@frodo.biederman.org>
- Sender: Rik van Riel <riel@nl.linux.org>
- User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 10:37:51PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> current->mm->mmap_sem really doesn't provide protection if there is
> a shared area between mappings in two different mm's. Not a problem
> if the code is a private mapping but otherwise...
> Does hugetlbfs support shared mappings? If it is exclusively
> for private mappings the code makes much more sense than I am
> thinking.
It's supposedly for massively shared mappings to reduce PTE overhead.
Well, in theory there's some kind of TLB benefit, but the only thing
ppl really care about is x86 pagetable structure gets rid of L3 space
entirely so you don't burn 12+GB of L3 pagetables for appserver loads.
-- wli
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/