[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH v3 1/6] mm: Don't unmap gup()ed page
On Wednesday 15 April 2009 00:32:52 Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 12:26:34AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > Andrea: I didn't veto that set_bit change of yours as such. I just
> I know you didn't ;)
> > noted there could be more atomic operations. Actually I would
> > welcome more comparison between our two approaches, but they seem
> Agree about the welcome of comparison, it'd be nice to measure it the
> enterprise workloads that showed the gup_fast gain in the first place.

I think we should be able to ask IBM to run some tests, provided
they still have machines available to do so. Although I don't want
to waste their time so we need to have something that has got past
initial code review and has a chance of being merged.

If we get that far, then I can ask them to run tests definitely.

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-04-14 16:45    [W:0.058 / U:30.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site