On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:31 AM, William Kucharski
wrote:
>
>
>> On May 17, 2018, at 9:23 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>
>> I'm certain it is. The other thing I believe is true that we should be
>> able to share page tables (my motivation is thousands of processes each
>> mapping the same ridicul
> On May 17, 2018, at 9:23 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
> I'm certain it is. The other thing I believe is true that we should be
> able to share page tables (my motivation is thousands of processes each
> mapping the same ridiculously-sized file). I was hoping this prototype
> would have code
On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 07:12:13AM -0600, William Kucharski wrote:
> One of the downsides of THP as currently implemented is that it only supports
> large page mappings for anonymous pages.
It does also support shmem.
> I embarked upon this prototype on the theory that it would be advantageous to
On 17 May 18 08:23, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
> I can't find any information on what page sizes SPARC supports.
> Maybe you could point me at a reference? All I've managed to find is
> the architecture manuals for SPARC which believe it is not their purpose
> to mandate an MMU.
>
Page sizes of 8K
> On May 17, 2018, at 1:57 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> [CCing Kirill and fs-devel]
>
> On Mon 14-05-18 07:12:13, William Kucharski wrote:
>> One of the downsides of THP as currently implemented is that it only supports
>> large page mappings for anonymous pages.
>
> There is a support for shm
[CCing Kirill and fs-devel]
On Mon 14-05-18 07:12:13, William Kucharski wrote:
> One of the downsides of THP as currently implemented is that it only supports
> large page mappings for anonymous pages.
There is a support for shmem merged already. ext4 was next on the plan
AFAIR but I haven't seen
> On May 14, 2018, at 9:19 AM, Christopher Lameter wrote:
>
> Cool. This could be controlled by the faultaround logic right? If we get
> fault_around_bytes up to huge page size then it is reasonable to use a
> huge page directly.
It isn't presently but certainly could be; for the prototype it
On Mon, 14 May 2018, William Kucharski wrote:
> The idea is that the kernel will attempt to allocate and map the range using a
> PMD sized THP page upon first fault; if the allocation is successful the page
> will be populated (at present using a call to kernel_read()) and the page will
> be mappe
One of the downsides of THP as currently implemented is that it only supports
large page mappings for anonymous pages.
I embarked upon this prototype on the theory that it would be advantageous to
be able to map large ranges of read-only text pages using THP as well.
The idea is that the kernel
9 matches
Mail list logo
