Re: MMU notifiers review and some proposals

[Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>]

On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 02:45:20AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:39:49 +0200 Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:
> 
> > I think everybody is hoping to have a workable mmu notifier scheme
> > merged in 2.6.27 (myself included). However I do have some concerns
> > about the implementation proposed (in -mm).
> > 
> > I apologise for this late review, before anybody gets too upset,
> > most of my concerns have been raised before, but I'd like to state
> > my case again and involving everyone.
> 
> Nick, having read through this discussion and the code (yet again) I
> think I'll go ahead and send it all in to Linus.  On the basis that

You call. As I said, I was OK for you to use your judgement.

 
> - the code is fairly short and simple
> 
> - has no known bugs
> 
> - seems to be needed by some folks ;)
> 
> - you already have a protopatch which partially addresses your
>   concerns and afaik there's nothing blocking future improvements to
>   this implementation?

Seems like I was able to get my head around KVM and GRU more easily
than I had feared. I don't expect help, but I will say that good
simplifications will always get merged unless there is a reasonable
performance case not to, so I will work on patches.


> And a late-breaking review comment: given that about 0.000000000000001%
> of people will actually use mm_take_all_locks(), could we make its
> compilation conditional on something?  Such as CONFIG_MMU_NOTIFIER?

Well I prefer that because I don't want any new callers to pop up.

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>