On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 09:27:55 +0100 Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> btw., if we decide that nonlinear isnt worth the continuing maintainance >> pain, we could internally implement/emulate sys_remap_file_pages() via a >> call to mremap() and essentially deprecate it, without breaking the ABI >> - and remove all the nonlinear code. (This would split fremap areas into >> separate vmas)
On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 12:35:20AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > I'm rather regretting having merged it - I don't think it has been used for > much. > Paolo's UML speedup patches might use nonlinear though. Guess what major real-life application not only uses nonlinear daily but would even be very happy to see it extended with non-vma-creating protections and more? It's not terribly typical for things to be truncated while remap_file_pages() is doing its work, though it's been proposed as a method of dynamism. It won't stress remap_file_pages() vs. truncate() in any meaningful way, though, as userspace will be rather diligent about clearing in-use data out of the file offset range to be truncated away anyway, and all that via O_DIRECT. -- wli - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
