Re: wrong madvise(MADV_DONTNEED) semantic

[Jörn Engel]

On Tue, 28 June 2005 22:20:53 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Jörn Engel, le Tue 28 Jun 2005 22:17:04 +0200, a écrit :
> > If the application knows 100% that it is the _only_ possible user of
> > this data and will never again use it, dropping dirty pages might be a
> > sane option.  Effectively that translates to anonymous memory only.
> 
> And private file mappings?

As in inode->i_nlink == 0?  Yes, if you can prove that only this one
thread still has it open.  How to deal with multithreaded processes?
I don't know and would default to "write it back" again.

Besides, writing the dirty pages to backing store can only hurt
performance, never correctness.  The data could already be synced at
the time of the madvice call anyway.

Jörn

-- 
This above all: to thine own self be true.
-- Shakespeare
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/