Re: [patch 0/6] MMU Notifiers V6

[Christoph Lameter]

On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, Robin Holt wrote:

> > > What about ib_umem_get()?
> > 
> > Ok. It pins using an elevated refcount. Same as XPmem right now. With that 
> > we effectively pin a page (page migration will fail) but we will 
> > continually be reclaiming the page and may repeatedly try to move it. We 
> > have issues with XPmem causing too many pages to be pinned and thus the 
> > OOM getting into weird behavior modes (OOM or stop lru scanning due to 
> > all_reclaimable set).
> > 
> > An elevated refcount will also not be noticed by any of the schemes under 
> > consideration to improve LRU scanning performance.
> 
> Christoph, I am not sure what you are saying here.  With v4 and later,
> I thought we were able to use the rmap invalidation to remove the ref
> count that XPMEM was holding and therefore be able to swapout.  Did I miss
> something?  I agree the existing XPMEM does pin.  I hope we are not saying
> the XPMEM based upon these patches will not be able to swap/migrate.

Correct.

You missed the turn of the conversation to how ib_umem_get() works. 
Currently it seems to pin the same way that the SLES10 XPmem works.



--
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/