Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:33:15 +0900 | From | KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <> | Subject | Re: [mm][RFC][PATCH 0/11] mm accessor updates. |
| |
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:31:40 +0900 Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> 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
| |