Re: Interesting VM feature?
From: H. Peter Anvin
Date: Wed Aug 20 2003 - 21:28:41 EST
Followup to: <20030815211937.GA20208@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
By author: Jamie Lokier <jamie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> Mike Fedyk wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 02:56:02PM -0500, mouschi@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > Is madvise required to result in zero filled pages
> > > by a standard, or is this just the commonly accepted
> > > behavior?
> > I believe it is the standard for clean pages, though someone else will have
> > to point out where...
> That's the answer to a different question.
> The unanswered question is: what should madvise(MADV_DONTNEED) do,
> given dirty pages?
> man madvise(*) says that it zero-fills anonymous private mappings, and
> restores private file-backed mappings to the original file pages.
> That is not surprising, as the CPU-friendly semantic is more
> complicated to implement, needing an extra flag in the page table
> (or rmap structure).
Sounds entirely reasonable.
It *would* be nice with a way to be able to say to the kernel "you may
discard this but if so I want SIGSEGV", for things like LPSM and the
<hpa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> at work, <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> in private!
If you send me mail in HTML format I will assume it's spam.
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
Architectures needed: ia64 m68k mips64 ppc ppc64 s390 s390x sh v850 x86-64
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/