Re: No more bits in vm_area_struct's vm_flags.

[Christoph Lameter]

On Thu, 1 Oct 2009, Hugh Dickins wrote:

> Are we doing that?  If you have some example like, when PG_slab is set
> then PG_owner_priv_1 means such-and-such, but if not not: okay, I'm
> fine with that.

Look at how compound pages are handled in include/linux/page-flags.h

> But if you're saying something like, if PG_reclaim is set at the same
> time as PG_buddy, then they mean the page is not a buddy or under
> reclaim, but brokenbacked: then I'm a bit (or even 32 bits) worried.

Of course you need to be careful not to use two bits that can be used
indepedently.

> > VM_HUGETLB cannot grow up and down f.e. and there are
> > certainly lots of other impossible combinations that can be used to put
> > more information into the flags.
>
> Where it makes sense, where it's understandable, okay: there may be a
> few which could naturally use combinations.  But in general, no, I
> think we'd be asking for endless maintenance trouble if we change the
> meaning of some flags according to other flags.

We made the page flags stuff configurable. On 64 bit we use more flags, on
32 bit we compress the page flags a bit. Maybe do the same for vm_flags?


--
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/