[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a0ea21a7cfe313202e2b51510aa5435a.squirrel@webmail-b.css.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 01:14:03 +0900 (JST)
From: "KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: "Hugh Dickins" <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>
Cc: "KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
"Wu Fengguang" <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
"Nigel Cunningham" <ncunningham@...a.org.au>,
"LKML" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: No more bits in vm_area_struct's vm_flags.
Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Sep 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>>
>> What I dislike is making vm_flags to be long long ;)
>
> Why?
I'm sorry if my "dislike" sounds too strong.
Every time I see long long in the kernel, my concern is
"do I need spinlock to access this for 32bit arch ? is it safe ?".
(And it makes binary=>disassemble=>C (by eyes) a bit difficult)
Then, I don't like long long personally.
Another reason is some other calls like test_bit() cannot be used against
long long. (even if it's not used _now_)
Maybe vm->vm_flags will not require extra locks because
it can be protected by bigger lock as mmap_sem. Then, please make it
to be long long if its's recommended.
keeping vm_flags to be 32bit may makes vma_merge() ugly.
If so, long long is a choice.
Thanks,
-Kame
> Hugh
>
--
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