From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:23:27 -0200 (BRDT) From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: [PATCH] guard mm->rss with page_table_lock (241p11) In-Reply-To: <20010131001737.C6620@metastasis.f00f.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Chris Wedgwood Cc: "David S. Miller" , David Howells , Rasmus Andersen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Chris Wedgwood wrote: > On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 12:39:24AM -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > > Please see older threads about this, it has been discussed to > death already (hint: sizeof(atomic_t), sizeof(unsigned long)). > > can we not define a macro so architectures that can do do atomically > inc/dec with unsigned long will? otherwise it uses the spinlock? Why bother ? In most places where we update mm->rss, we are *already* holding the spinlock anyway, this correction is just for a few places. The big patch Rasmus made seems to contain spin_lock(&foo) in places where we already have the lock, leading to instant SMP deadlock. I suspect Rasmus' patch should be about half the size it is currently... regards, Rik -- Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose... http://www.surriel.com/ http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com.br/ -- 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.eu.org/Linux-MM/