From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E83016B0062 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 05:36:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.74]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id nBGAaOn5023231 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:36:24 +0900 Received: from smail (m4 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 024732AEA81 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:36:24 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.94]) by m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3AEB45DE4D for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:36:23 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 029BF1DB8037 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:36:23 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.104]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59A661DB8042 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:36:19 +0900 (JST) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:33:15 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [mm][RFC][PATCH 0/11] mm accessor updates. Message-Id: <20091216193315.14a508d5.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <28c262360912160231r18db8478sf41349362360cab8@mail.gmail.com> References: <20091216120011.3eecfe79.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091216101107.GA15031@basil.fritz.box> <20091216191312.f4655dac.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091216102806.GC15031@basil.fritz.box> <28c262360912160231r18db8478sf41349362360cab8@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Minchan Kim Cc: Andi Kleen , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , cl@linux-foundation.org, "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "mingo@elte.hu" List-ID: On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:31:40 +0900 Minchan Kim wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Andi Kleen wrote: > >> > Also the patches didn't fare too well in testing unfortunately. > >> > > >> > I suspect we'll rather need multiple locks split per address > >> > space range. > >> > >> This set doesn't include any changes of the logic. Just replace all mmap_sem. > >> I think this is good start point (for introducing another logic etc..) > > > > The problem is that for range locking simple wrapping the locks > > in macros is not enough. You need more changes. > > I agree. > > We can't justify to merge as only this patch series although this > doesn't change > any behavior. > > After we see the further works, let us discuss this patch's value. > Ok, I'll show new version of speculative page fault. > Nitpick: > In case of big patch series, it would be better to provide separate > all-at-once patch > with convenience for easy patch and testing. :) > Sure, keep it in my mind. Thanks, -Kame -- 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