From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 05:25:34 -0800 From: William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: 2.6.0-test10-mm1 Message-ID: <20031126132534.GO8039@holomorphy.com> References: <20031125211518.6f656d73.akpm@osdl.org> <20031126085123.A1952@infradead.org> <20031126044251.3b8309c1.akpm@osdl.org> <20031126130936.A5275@infradead.org> <20031126132144.GN8039@holomorphy.com> <20031126132311.B5477@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031126132311.B5477@infradead.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 05:21:44AM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote: >> I'm not one to toe the party line, but this really does seem innocuous >> and of more general use than GPFS. I'd say walking pagetables directly >> in fs and/or device drivers is more invasive wrt. VM internals than >> calling a well-established procedure, but that's just me. On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 01:23:11PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > GPFS is doing all that, too of course. Take a look at their glue code > at oss.software.ibm.com (and take a barf-bag with you while you're at > it..) I've got a relatively concrete notion GPFS is not particularly meritorious. =( Perhaps invalid_mmap_range() would be better off with a poster child that's taken a bath sometime in its life... -- wli -- 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: aart@kvack.org