Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 16 Feb 2001 18:20:20 +0100 | From | Jamie Lokier <> | Subject | Re: x86 ptep_get_and_clear question |
| |
Manfred Spraul wrote: > Ok, Is there one case were your pragmatic solutions is vastly faster?
> * mprotect: No. The difference is at most one additional locked > instruction for each pte.
Oh, what instruction is that?
> * munmap(anon): No. We must handle delayed accessed anyway (don't call > free_pages_ok() until flush_tlb_ipi returned). The difference is that we > might have to perform a second pass to clear any spurious 0x40 bits.
That second pass is what I had in mind.
> * munmap(file): No. Second pass required for correct msync behaviour.
It is?
-- Jamie
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |