Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 18 Jul 1998 11:34:02 -0400 | From | Bill Hawes <> | Subject | Re: patch to trim page table cache |
| |
David S. Miller wrote:
> UGH!!! They don't need spinlock protection!!! > > The whole beauty of the design of the pgt_caches was that they _never_ > need any locking even on SMP. They are local cpu cache lists, never > accessed from within' interrupts even.
OK, no problem. I've removed the locking changes, and added comments to make it clear that the cache draining doesn't need locking.
> Now, what this does point out, is that perhaps the machanism is not > commented properly, but actually I do remember this being explained in > the pgtable.h implementation level code at least on Sparc.
Perhaps it would be helpful to define the pxx_quicklist macros with a dummy CPU argument, to make it clearer that they depend on the CPU? Maybe something like
#define pte_quicklist(thisCPU) (current_CPU_data.whatever)
This wouldn't change the code, but would help the human readers ...
Regards, Bill
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
| |