[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1302051116380.11905@ionos>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 11:18:12 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Qiang Huang <h.huangqiang@...wei.com>
cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
peterz@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.6.11-rt26
On Tue, 5 Feb 2013, Qiang Huang wrote:
> On 2013/2/4 22:58, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >From patches-3.6.11-rt28.patch.gz, your patch x86-highmem-make-it-work.patch
> did this work. And you said
> "It had been enabled quite some time, but never really worked."
>
> But I think there is a previous patch mm-rt-kmap-atomic-scheduling.patch did
> the job, so I think RT highmem on x86 should have worked.
>
> Now with your patch, if we use kmap instead of kmap_atomic on RT, do we need
> to revert Peter's patch as well?
I should have done that, yes.
> I haven't tested it, but if Peter's patch did solved the problem, is his way
> better than use kmap? Because we can use more highmem virtual address,
> although with some switch latency in some small probability scenarios.
In theory it's better. Though I ran into some issues with that
approach. It's on my todo list to revisit that problem, but for now
the kmap way is at least safer.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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