[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080619092242.79648592.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 09:22:42 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>
Cc: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Kosaki Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Experimental][PATCH] putback_lru_page rework
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 14:21:06 -0400
Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-06-18 at 18:40 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > Lee-san, how about this ?
> > Tested on x86-64 and tried Nisimura-san's test at el. works good now.
>
> I have been testing with my work load on both ia64 and x86_64 and it
> seems to be working well. I'll let them run for a day or so.
>
thank you.
<snip>
> > @@ -240,6 +232,9 @@ static int __munlock_pte_handler(pte_t *
> > struct page *page;
> > pte_t pte;
> >
> > + /*
> > + * page is never be unmapped by page-reclaim. we lock this page now.
> > + */
>
> I don't understand what you're trying to say here. That is, what the
> point of this comment is...
>
We access the page-table without taking pte_lock. But this vm is MLOCKED
and migration-race is handled. So we don't need to be too nervous to access
the pte. I'll consider more meaningful words.
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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