From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964841AbVHOQhw (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:37:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964839AbVHOQhw (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:37:52 -0400 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.200]:14696 "EHLO wproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964835AbVHOQhv convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:37:51 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=LViOnZ9+QAvLL1C3V/YJnFJn/jq45GLYMpyS5DpXjGVimY+76C8jwidW6p/Y21dhEn/KOptpqV8u5x5Mz0801gWyNaigaLzx59YJc9PckT+XULeYcmS3rXU3MUldgjTW/BkE0540GwAYxPAsH/bsQWyCUMuiDClcJ12lUXJbzcU= Message-ID: <5ebee0d10508150937da6c1ed@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:37:50 -0400 From: Bill Jordan To: Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: [openib-general] Re: [PATCH repost] PROT_DONTCOPY: ifiniband uverbs fork support Cc: Hugh Dickins , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Roland Dreier , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, openib-general@openib.org In-Reply-To: <20050811080205.GR16361@minantech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <20050719165542.GB16028@mellanox.co.il> <20050725171928.GC12206@mellanox.co.il> <20050726133553.GA22276@mellanox.co.il> <20050810083943.GM16361@minantech.com> <20050810132611.GP16361@minantech.com> <20050811080205.GR16361@minantech.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 8/11/05, Gleb Natapov wrote: > What about the idea that was floating around about new VM flag that will > instruct kernel to copy pages belonging to the vma on fork instead of mark > them as cow? > I think the big problem with this idea is the huge memory regions that InfiniBand applications are dealing with. If the application forks (or uses system()), you are going to copy a huge chunk of data (most likely swapping since the application memory footprint is probably already tuned to consume the available physical memory). And the copy is really for nothing since in most (or at least many) cases the child is just going to exec anyway. -- Bill Jordan