[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: please revert bogus patch to vmscan.c
On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 09:25:46PM -0500, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> > I fully well expect it to be. However, from the point of view of stability
> > we *want* to be conservative and correct. If Al had to demonstrate with
> Dave just told you what this change has to do with stability, not sure
> why you keep reiterating about stability and correctness.
> But of course going from page flush to the mm flush is fine from my part
> too. As Linus noted a few days ago during swapout we're going to block
> and reschedule all the time, so the range flush is going to be a noop in

Only on architectures where the TLB (or equivalent) is
small and only capable of holding entries for one address
space at a time.

It's simply not true on eg PPC.

DMCA, SSSCA, W3C? Who cares?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:12    [W:0.368 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site