[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140228001858.GC8034@node.dhcp.inet.fi>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 02:18:58 +0200
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@...el.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Ning Qu <quning@...il.com>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
anton@...ba.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 1/2] mm: introduce vm_ops->map_pages()
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 02:34:55PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Kirill's git test suite runs did show that it _can_ hurt in some cases.
And see last use-case for how much it can hurt. :)
It shouldn't differs much for the same *number* of pages between [u]archs
unless setup of the pte is significantly more expensive or page fault is
faster.
But of course, I can move FAULT_AROUND_PAGES to arch/x86/ and let
architecture mantainers to decide if they want the feature. ;)
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
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