Re: [PATCH 4/2] numa, mm: Rename the PROT_NONE fault handlingfunctions

[Ingo Molnar]

* Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 10/21/2012 08:50 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> >* Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >>>>I don't much care either way, but I was thinking walken
> >>>>might want to use something similar to do WSS estimation,
> >>>>in which case the NUMA name is just as wrong.
> >>>
> >>>That's a good point. I had not considered other uses of the
> >>>same code.
> >>
> >>Renaming the functions for more clarity still makes sense IMO:
> >>we could give it a _wss or _working_set prefix/postfix?
> >
> >So, to not drop your patch on the floor I've modified it as per
> >the patch below.
> >
> >The _wss() names signal that these handlers are used for a
> >specific purpose, they are not related to the regular PROT_NONE
> >handling code.
> 
> Michel indicated that he does not use PROT_NONE for his 
> working set estimation code, but instead checks the accessed 
> bits in the page tables.

The pte_young() WSS method has a couple of fundamental 
limitations:

 - it doesn't work with shared memory very well, the pte is per
   mapping, not per page. The PROT_NONE method instruments the
   physical page in essence.

 - it does not tell us which task touched the pte, in a
   multi-threaded program

So like Peter I'd too expect these new WSS methods to eventually 
be picked up for any serious WSS work.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/