| Date | Tue, 01 Apr 2014 14:35:58 -0700 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/5] Volatile Ranges (v12) & LSF-MM discussion fodder |
| |
On 04/01/2014 02:21 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > Either way, optimistic volatile pointers are nowhere near as > transparent to the application as the above description suggests, > which makes this usecase not very interesting, IMO. >
... however, I think you're still derating the value way too much. The case of user space doing elastic memory management is more and more common, and for a lot of those applications it is perfectly reasonable to either not do system calls or to have to devolatilize first.
-hpa
|