Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 24 Jun 2003 18:10:31 -0700 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] My research agenda for 2.7 |
| |
On Wednesday 25 June 2003 02:47, William Lee Irwin III wrote: >> Per struct address_space? This is an unnecessary limitation.
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 03:07:18AM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > It's a sensible limitation, it keeps the radix tree lookup simple.
It severely limits its usefulness. Dropping in a more flexible data structure should be fine.
On Wednesday 25 June 2003 02:47, William Lee Irwin III wrote: >> This gives me the same data structure proliferation chills as bh's.
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 03:07:18AM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > It's not nearly as bad. There is no distinction between subpage and base > struct page for almost all page operations, e.g., locking, IO, data access.
But those are code sanitation issues. You need to make sure this doesn't explode on PAE.
-- wli - 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/
| |