Re: 2.4.22pre6aa1

From: William Lee Irwin III (
Date: Fri Jul 18 2003 - 18:04:31 EST

On Sat, Jul 19, 2003 at 12:53:28AM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> I tend to think the creation/destruction will be the most noticeable
> performance difference in practice. allocating 42G in a single block
> will take a bit of time ;). I'm not necessairly worse or unacceptable,
> but it's different. And I feel I've to retain the bigpages= API (as an
> API not as in implementation) anyways. Furthmore I'm unsure if hugtlbfs
> is relaxed like the shm-largpeage patch is, I mean, it should be
> possible to mmap the stuff with 4k granularty too, or stuff could break
> due that change of API too.

I've just not gotten feedback about creation and destruction; I get the
impression it's an uncommon operation.

The alignment etc. considerations are bits I probably can't get merged. =(

Most of the work I did was trying to get the preexisting semantics into
more standard-looking API's, e.g. vfs ops and standard-ish sysv shm.

-- wli
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 23 2003 - 22:00:36 EST