Re: [PATCH v6] add MAP_UNLOCKED mmap flag
From: Gleb Natapov
Date: Mon Jan 18 2010 - 13:20:41 EST
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 08:09:26PM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> Hi Gleb,
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Gleb Natapov <gleb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> "Greater control" is not an argument for adding a new API that needs
> >> to be maintained forever, a real world use case is.
> > If there is real world use case for mlockall() there is real use case for
> > this too. People seems to be trying to convince me that I don't need
> > mlockall() without proposing alternatives. The only alternative I see
> > lock everything from userspace.
> >> And yes, this stuff needs to be in the changelog. Whether you want to
> >> spell it out or post an URL to some previous discussion is up to you.
> > The discussion was here just a couple of days ago. Here is the link
> > were I describe my use case: http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=126345374125942&w=2
> > If you think it needs to be spelled out in commit log I'll do it.
> So this is a performance thing? Btw, is there are reason you can't use
> plain mlock() for it as suggested by Peter earlier?
I can't realistically chase every address space mapping changes and mlock
new areas. The only way other then mlockall() is to use custom memory
allocator that allocates mlocked memory.
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/