From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com (mail-pa0-f41.google.com [209.85.220.41]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA8D86B0035 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2014 01:20:14 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id fa1so1446425pad.14 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 22:20:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from LGEMRELSE6Q.lge.com (LGEMRELSE6Q.lge.com. [156.147.1.121]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id p3si12680609pbj.278.2014.01.22.22.20.11 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 22:20:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 15:21:28 +0900 From: Minchan Kim Subject: [LSF/MM TOPIC] volatile range: part 2 Message-ID: <20140123062128.GB14369@bbox> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, John Stultz Last year, there was discussion about volatile range but it seems there wasn't no progress because John and I were stucked other urgent works. Recently, we modified many part of volatile range and submit test code for volatile range anonymous part. http://lwn.net/Articles/578761/ But still we didn't get indepth code review and many feedback. It makes very hard to proceed that work. I believe it's really nice concept and other OSes already similar system call so lack of interesting from other MM guys is totally my fault. In this summit, I will summarize current status and known problems I'm thinking so I hope lots of feedback and you guys will give a time slot to review. Thanks. -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- 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