[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100105150932.ab2e6820.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:09:32 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, cl@...ux-foundation.org,
"hugh.dickins" <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/8] mm: handle_speculative_fault()
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:09:47 +0900
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com> wrote:
> My humble opinion is following as.
>
> Couldn't we synchronize rcu in that cases(munmap, exit and so on)?
> It can delay munap and exit but it would be better than handling them by more
> complicated things, I think. And both cases aren't often cases so we
> can achieve advantage than disadvantage?
>
In most case, a program is single threaded. And sychronize_rcu() in unmap path
just adds very big overhead.
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