Re: TASK_SIZE is variable.

["David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>]

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 23:10:02 +1100
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> wrote:

> Andi Kleen writes:
> 
> > I plan to fix this anyways in a more generic way - 4 level currently
> > has some bad performance regression because it scans much more pagetables.
> > DaveM had an old patch to use bitmaps for used entries in struct page.
> > For your 32bit processes only the first bit would be set and it would not
> > look at most of the pgds.  The plan was to redo Dave's old patch
> > for 4 level (I wanted to redo it a bit because I didn't like how
> > his iterators worked)
> 
> Sounds good.  I'm looking forward to the patch.
> 
> In the meantime I think that MM_VM_SIZE(mm) should be renamed to
> MAX_TASK_SIZE without the mm argument.  MAX_TASK_SIZE can default to
> TASK_SIZE and be overridden on architectures that have more than one
> task size.

I'm looking forward very much to Andi's work as well.

However, I like the mm->max_addr idea because that could be used
for the mmap()/munmap()/mremap() sanity checks as well instead of
bogus TASK_SIZE.

There are some compat syscalls for the mmap like stuff that exists
only to validate the address ranges for compat task limits.