[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0801291148080.24807@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:49:07 -0800 (PST)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...ranet.com>
cc: Robin Holt <holt@....com>, Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>,
Izik Eidus <izike@...ranet.com>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
kvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, steiner@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
daniel.blueman@...drics.com, Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/6] mmu_notifier: Core code
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > + struct mmu_notifier_head mmu_notifier; /* MMU notifier list */
> > };
>
> Not sure why you prefer to waste ram when MMU_NOTIFIER=n, this is a
> regression (a minor one though).
Andrew does not like #ifdefs and it makes it possible to verify calling
conventions if !CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER.
> It's out of my reach how can you be ok with lock=1. You said you have
> to block, if you can deal with lock=1 once, why can't you deal with
> lock=1 _always_?
Not sure yet. We may have to do more in that area. Need to have feedback
from Robin.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists