[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200904150042.15653.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 00:42:14 +1000
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
Subject: Re: [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.
--
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