On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 12:53:28AM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> I tend to think the creation/destruction will be the most noticeable
> performance difference in practice. allocating 42G in a single block
> will take a bit of time ;). I'm not necessairly worse or unacceptable,
> but it's different. And I feel I've to retain the bigpages= API (as an
> API not as in implementation) anyways. Furthmore I'm unsure if hugtlbfs
> is relaxed like the shm-largpeage patch is, I mean, it should be
> possible to mmap the stuff with 4k granularty too, or stuff could break
> due that change of API too.
I've just not gotten feedback about creation and destruction; I get the
impression it's an uncommon operation.
The alignment etc. considerations are bits I probably can't get merged. =(
Most of the work I did was trying to get the preexisting semantics into
more standard-looking API's, e.g. vfs ops and standard-ish sysv shm.
-- wli
-
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 : Wed Jul 23 2003 - 22:00:36 EST