From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@parallels.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Change soft-dirty interface?
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 10:53:29 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130613015329.GA3894@bbox> (raw)
Hi all,
Sorry for late interrupting to promote patchset to the mainline.
I'd like to discuss our usecase so I'd like to change per-process
interface with per-range interface.
Our usecase is following as,
A application allocates a big buffer(A) and makes backup buffer(B)
for it and copy B from A.
Let's assume A consists of subranges (A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4).
As time goes by, application can modify anywhere of A.
In this example, let's assume A-1 and A-2 are modified.
When the time happen, we compare A-1 with B-1 to make
diff of the range(On every iteration, we don't need all range's diff by design)
and do something with diff, then we'd like to remark only the A-1 with
soft-dirty, NOT A's all range of the process to track the A-1's
further difference in future while keeping dirty information (A-2, A-3, A-4)
because we will make A-2's diff in next iteration.
We can't do it by existing interface.
So, I'd like to add [addr, len] argument with using proc
echo 4 0x100000 0x3000 > /proc/self/clear_refs
It doesn't break anything but not sure everyone like the interface
because recently I heard from akpm following comment.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/5/21/529
Although per-process reclaim is another story with this,
I feel he seems to hate doing something on proc interface with
/proc/pid/maps like above range parameter.
If it's not allowed, another approach should be new system call.
int sys_softdirty(pid_t pid, void *addr, size_t len);
If we approach new system call, we don't need to maintain current
proc interface and it would be very handy to get a information
without pagemap (open/read/close) so we can add a parameter to
get a dirty information easily.
int sys_softdirty(pid_t pid, void *addr, size_t len, unsigned char *vec)
What do you think about it?
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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>
next reply other threads:[~2013-06-13 1:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-13 1:53 Minchan Kim [this message]
2013-06-13 9:10 ` Change soft-dirty interface? Pavel Emelyanov
2013-06-14 0:32 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-14 0:41 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-14 5:07 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-14 10:01 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2013-06-14 11:22 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-14 11:37 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2013-06-15 6:41 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-19 9:31 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2013-06-21 1:41 ` Minchan Kim
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130613015329.GA3894@bbox \
--to=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=xemul@parallels.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).