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

Re: What to expect with the 2.6 VM

To: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
Subject: Re: What to expect with the 2.6 VM
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 14:07:03 -0400 (EDT)
cc: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Fake-Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
In-Reply-To: <461030000.1057165809@flay>
Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mm-archive@humbolt.geo.uu.nl
Sender: Rik van Riel <riel@nl.linux.org>

On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Martin J. Bligh wrote:

> Maybe I'm just taking this out of context, and it's twisting my brain,
> but as far as I know, the nonlinear vma's *are* backed by pte_chains.

They are, but IMHO they shouldn't be.  The nonlinear vmas are used
only for database shared memory segments and other "bypass the VM"
applications, so I don't see any reason why we need to complicate
things hopelessly in order to deal with corner cases like truncate.

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>

References:
- Re: What to expect with the 2.6 VM
  - From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>

Prev by Date: Re: What to expect with the 2.6 VM
Next by Date: Re: What to expect with the 2.6 VM
Prev by thread: Re: What to expect with the 2.6 VM
Next by thread: Re: What to expect with the 2.6 VM
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread