Re: [mm][RFC][PATCH 0/11] mm accessor updates.

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:31:40 +0900
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > Also the patches didn't fare too well in testing unfortunately.
> >> >
> >> > I suspect we'll rather need multiple locks split per address
> >> > space range.
> >>
> >> This set doesn't include any changes of the logic. Just replace all mmap_sem.
> >> I think this is good start point (for introducing another logic etc..)
> >
> > The problem is that for range locking simple wrapping the locks
> > in macros is not enough. You need more changes.
> 
> I agree.
> 
> We can't justify to merge as only this patch series although this
> doesn't change
> any behavior.
> 

> After we see the further works, let us discuss this patch's value.
> 
Ok, I'll show new version of speculative page fault.


> Nitpick:
> In case of big patch series, it would be better to provide separate
> all-at-once patch
> with convenience for easy patch and testing. :)
> 
Sure, keep it in my mind.

Thanks,
-Kame

--
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/