linux-kernel - Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20070427121557.de9e8b4a.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Fri, 27 Apr 2007 12:15:57 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>
Cc:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>, David Chinner <dgc@....com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mel Gorman <mel@...net.ie>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...il.com>,
	Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 06:44:51 -0700 William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 11:55:42PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Please address my point: if in five years time x86 has larger or varible
> > pagesize, this code will be a permanent millstone around our necks which we
> > *should not have merged*.
> > And if in five years time x86 does not have larger pagesize support then
> > the manufacturers would have decided that 4k pages are not a performance
> > problem, so we again should not have merged this code.
> 
> So the verdict is wait 5 years, see if x86 did anything, and so on.

You missed the bit about "evaluate alternatives".
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/