[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170829081508.rmw6retdq64h32yu@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 10:15:08 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mhocko@...nel.org, dave@...olabs.net, jack@...e.cz,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, mpe@...erman.id.au,
paulus@...ba.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, hpa@...or.com,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
haren@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
npiggin@...il.com, bsingharora@...il.com,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 14/20] mm: Provide speculative fault infrastructure
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 03:35:11PM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Yes the whole thing is quite risky. Probably will need some
> kind of per architecture opt-in scheme?
See patch 19/20, that not enough for you?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists