Re: [PATCH 4/4] mm: numa: Slow PTE scan rate if migration failures occur

From: Linus Torvalds
Date: Wed Mar 18 2015 - 13:31:35 EST


On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> So why am I wrong? Why is testing for dirty not the same as testing
> for writable?
>
> I can see a few cases:
>
> - your load has lots of writable (but not written-to) shared memory

Hmm. I tried to look at the xfsprog sources, and I don't see any
MAP_SHARED activity. It looks like it's just using pread64/pwrite64,
and the only MAP_SHARED is for the xfsio mmap test thing, not for
xfsrepair.

So I don't see any shared mappings, but I don't know the code-base.

> - something completely different that I am entirely missing

So I think there's something I'm missing. For non-shared mappings, I
still have the idea that pte_dirty should be the same as pte_write.
And yet, your testing of 3.19 shows that it's a big difference.
There's clearly something I'm completely missing.

Linus
--
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/