Re: RFC/POC Make Page Tables Relocatable

[Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>]

On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 15:53 -0400, Ross Biro wrote:
> On 10/25/07, Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > My guys says that this is way too complicated to be pursued in this
> > form.  But, don't listen to me.  You don't have to convince _me_.
> 
> At this point, I'm more interested if anyone has any objections in
> principle to the overall thing.  If so, and they are legitimate, then
> it's not worth pursuing.  If not, then I'll start.  However, I
> disagree with your order.

Me too!  I just ran through your patch and wrote ideas as I saw them in
your patch order.  I bet they need to be done in much different orders
in reality. 

> I'm thinking more like:
> 
> 1) Support for relocation.

Generic slab relocation, right?

> 2) Support for handles

I've heard these handles are more or less what some other UNIXes do.
That doesn't give it points in my book.  :)

> 3) Test module.
> 
> These three work together and give a framework for validating the
> relocation code with out causing too much trouble.  The only problem
> is that they are mostly useless on their own.

Useless on their own is actually OK.  Patches series are often useless
up until patch 943/943.

> Then the page table related code, using your suggestion above
> (provided I can get it to work.  I'm worried about the page table
> being freed while I'm trying to figure out what mm it belongs to.)
> I'll break this into small chunks.

How would it get freed?

-- Dave

--
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:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>