Re: uarea swap-out
Andrew Doran <[email protected]> Sat, 29 Aug 2009 09:49:38 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.kernel,gmane.os.netbsd.ports.arm26,gmane.os.netbsd.ports.acorn32 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 10:59:06PM +0100, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: > http://www.netbsd.org/~rmind/uarea_swapout4.diff - Suggest leaving the ps keywords in place and documented. Removing them could break scripts, and leaving them in serves as a reminder not to reuse the same flag letters in the display. top and systat are by and large visual so I don't have the same concern about them. Benfit of removing them is only cosmetic. - You can probably get rid of XS_CTL_DATA_ONSTACK. - lwp_t::l_swaplock: worth leaving as a reserved field? - uvmexp_sysctl::swapins, swapouts: would leave these and not rename so you don't break compilation of third party software. Consider the various X widgets that display graphs and so on. - As an aside, elimination of pmap_collect() gets us a closer to the simplification of pmap locking that I proposed earlier this year - where MD page manipluation are implicitly locked by caller using the containing object's lock (uvm_object and/or amap). It also allows lockless pmap_extract() to be safe again - I can't remember if I disabled this. It was unsafe because pmap_collect() was a "side channel" where PTEs and so on could be ripped out from under the process even with the correct uvm_object/amap locked. Thanks!