[Linaro-mm-sig] Memory Management Discussion

[Rebecca Schultz Zavin]

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes at virtuousgeek.org>wrote:

> On Thu, 21 Apr 2011 16:09:46 +0100
> Tom Cooksey <Tom.Cooksey at arm.com> wrote:
>
> > > Client apps also have to worry about the fd count, since depending on
> > > the app and object caching policy it's very easy to get over 1024
> > > objects.  But the solutions above may work for that case as well; I
> > > don't expect many apps rely on select(), and those that do can fairly
> > > easily be converted.
> >
> > Though presumably not if you only have an fd for buffers you want to
> > share with another process or device? I think the common case is you
> > don't want to share a texture or command buffer or whatever with
> > another process, so most of the objects don't need an fd?
>
> Oh sure, if you don't actually allocate fds for the objects, then
> there's no issue.  But I think the ION proposal created fds for mapped
> objects as well?  That count could get pretty high...
>

That's lazy programmer (me) wanting to be able to mmap at an offset and not
wanting to implement all of mmap in an ioctl.  Anyway I think you can map
them and then close them, wouldn't that allow you to recycle the fd?


>
> --
> Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linaro-mm-sig mailing list
> Linaro-mm-sig at lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-mm-sig
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-mm-sig/attachments/20110421/04904ad3/attachment.html>