From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D4286B0092 for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 16:08:45 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/25] mm: Preemptibility -v7 From: Peter Zijlstra In-Reply-To: <4D3F36CB.6060505@linux.intel.com> References: <20110125173111.720927511@chello.nl> <1295987985.28776.1118.camel@laptop> <4D3F36CB.6060505@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 22:09:30 +0100 Message-ID: <1295989770.28776.1127.camel@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Andi Kleen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Hugh Dickins , benh List-ID: On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 12:47 -0800, Andi Kleen wrote: >=20 > I thought the reason for the preempt off inside the mmu gather region was > to stay on the same CPU for local/remote flushes. How would it change tha= t?=20 afaik its been preempt-off solely because it was always inside a number of spinlocks, I know both Hugh and BenH worked on making it preemptible far before I started this. I remember Hugh and Nick talking about this at OLS'06 or 07, can't really remember. As to local/remote flushes, there is no real saying where the pages came from due to on-demand paging and the scheduler never having had a notion of home-node. Therefore freeing them wouldn't be more of less local if that is exposed to the same migration as allocation was. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org