From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: mlock: mlocked pages are unevictable From: Peter Zijlstra In-Reply-To: <1224621015.6724.6.camel@twins> References: <200810201659.m9KGxtFC016280@hera.kernel.org> <20081021151301.GE4980@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <2f11576a0810210851g6e0d86benef5d801871886dd7@mail.gmail.com> <2f11576a0810211018g5166c1byc182f1194cfdd45d@mail.gmail.com> <1224621015.6724.6.camel@twins> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 22:48:06 +0200 Message-Id: <1224622086.6724.8.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: Heiko Carstens , Nick Piggin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hugh Dickins , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Rik van Riel , Lee Schermerhorn , linux-mm@kvack.org, Oleg Nesterov List-ID: On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 22:30 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > The problem appears to be calling flush_work(), which is rather heavy > handed. We could do schedule_on_each_cpu() using a completion. > > Which I think is a nicer solution (if sufficient of course). Ah, never mind, the flush_work() is already doing the right thing using barriers and completions. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org