Re: [PATCH v7 3/6] mm: Introduce VM_LOCKONFAULT

[Eric B Munson]

On Thu, 20 Aug 2015, Michal Hocko wrote:

> On Wed 19-08-15 17:33:45, Eric B Munson wrote:
> [...]
> > The group which asked for this feature here
> > wants the ability to distinguish between LOCKED and LOCKONFAULT regions
> > and without the VMA flag there isn't a way to do that.
> 
> Could you be more specific on why this is needed?

They want to keep metrics on the amount of memory used in a LOCKONFAULT
region versus the address space of the region.

> 
> > Do we know that these last two open flags are needed right now or is
> > this speculation that they will be and that none of the other VMA flags
> > can be reclaimed?
> 
> I do not think they are needed by anybody right now but that is not a
> reason why it should be used without a really strong justification.
> If the discoverability is really needed then fair enough but I haven't
> seen any justification for that yet.

To be completely clear you believe that if the metrics collection is
not a strong enough justification, it is better to expand the mm_struct
by another unsigned long than to use one of these bits right?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature