Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 1 Oct 2012 20:05:00 +0200 | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/3] Virtual huge zero page |
| |
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 10:33:12AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > ... and I think it would be worthwhile to know which effect dominates > (or neither, in which case it doesn't matter). > > Overall, I'm okay with either as long as we don't lock down 2 MB when > there isn't a huge zero page in use.
Same here.
I agree the cmpxchg idea to free the 2M zero page, was a very nice addition to the physical zero page patchset.
| |