Hi!
> > > In short the same way MAP_ANON must pageout correctly, also MAP_SHARED
> > > must swapout correctly with very vm intensive conditions.
>
> I strongly agree with Andrea on that. Swap fault without page lock
> was a step forward, reinstating it in the light of observed degradation
> in one workload was right decision for that particular tail of release,
> but it's a shame to have stayed that way.
>
> > That is true, but it is ignoring the fact that there _are_ real technical
> > differences between swap cache mappings and regular shared mappings.
> >
> > One major difference is the approach to the last user: a last use of a
> > shared mapping still needs to write out dirty state, while the last use of
> > a swap page is better off noticing that it should just optimize away the
> > write, and we can just turn the page back into a dirty anonymous page.
>
> Poor example: isn't last use of swap page just like last use of
> shared mapping of an _unlinked_ file?
Eh? Suppose I have two different shared mappings of (unlinked:3). It
may be last use of swap page in first mapping, but what prevents me
from seeking and trying to read what I wrote?
Pavel
-- (about SSSCA) "I don't say this lightly. However, I really think that the U.S. no longer is classifiable as a democracy, but rather as a plutocracy." --hpa - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 07 2002 - 22:00:25 EST