From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1031340AbbD1XKF (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 28 Apr 2015 19:10:05 -0400
Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:36425 "EHLO
	mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1030966AbbD1XKD (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 28 Apr 2015 19:10:03 -0400
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 16:10:01 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] mm: mmap make MAP_LOCKED really mlock semantic
Message-Id: <20150428161001.e854fb3eaf82f738865130af@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <1430223111-14817-2-git-send-email-mhocko@suse.cz>
References: <20150114095019.GC4706@dhcp22.suse.cz>
	<1430223111-14817-1-git-send-email-mhocko@suse.cz>
	<1430223111-14817-2-git-send-email-mhocko@suse.cz>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.4.1 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 14:11:49 +0200 Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz> wrote:

> The man page however says
> "
> MAP_LOCKED (since Linux 2.5.37)
>       Lock the pages of the mapped region into memory in the manner of
>       mlock(2).  This flag is ignored in older kernels.
> "

I'm trying to remember why we implemented MAP_LOCKED in the first
place.  Was it better than mmap+mlock in some fashion?

afaict we had a #define MAP_LOCKED in the header file but it wasn't
implemented, so we went and wired it up.  13 years ago:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2002/9/18/108


Anyway...  the third way of doing this is to use plain old mmap() while
mlockall(MCL_FUTURE) is in force.  Has anyone looked at that, checked
that the behaviour is sane and compared it with the mmap+mlock
behaviour, the MAP_LOCKED behaviour and the manpages?