From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ray Bryant Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 19:05:13 +0000 Subject: Re: hugetlb demand paging patch part [2/3] Message-Id: <40802E69.7040506@sgi.com> List-Id: References: <20040416032725.GG12735@zax> <200404160413.i3G4DcF13729@unix-os.sc.intel.com> <20040416044917.GB26707@zax> In-Reply-To: <20040416044917.GB26707@zax> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: 'David Gibson' Cc: "Chen, Kenneth W" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, 'Andy Whitcroft' , 'Andrew Morton' David, Is there a big user demand for copy-on-write support for hugetlb pages? I can understand the rationale for making hugetlb pages behave more like user pages, and fixing the problem that hugetlb pages are shared across fork via MAP_SHARE semantics regardless of whether the user requests MAP_PRIVATE or not, but it just doesn't strike me as something that anyone who uses hugetlb pages would actually want. Of course, YRMV (your requirements may vary). :-) 'David Gibson' wrote: > > Well, I'm attempting to understand the hugepage code across all the > archs, so that I can try to implement copy-on-write with a minimum of > arch specific gunk. Simplifying and consolidating the existing code > across archs would be a helpful first step, if possible. > -- Best Regards, Ray ----------------------------------------------- Ray Bryant 512-453-9679 (work) 512-507-7807 (cell) raybry@sgi.com raybry@austin.rr.com The box said: "Requires Windows 98 or better", so I installed Linux. -----------------------------------------------