[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1001071639560.7821@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 16:41:43 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"minchan.kim@...il.com" <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
"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 Thu, 7 Jan 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> - the patch I sent out just falls back to the old code if it finds
> something fishy, so it will do whatever do_brk() does regardless.
Btw, I'd like to state it again - the patch I sent out was not ready to be
applied. I'm pretty sure it should check things like certain vm_flags
too(VM_LOCKED etc), and fall back for those cases as well.
So the patch was more meant to illustrate the _concept_ than meant to
necessarily be taken seriously as-is.
Linus
--
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