From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from blonde.wat.veritas.com([10.10.97.26]) (1456 bytes) by megami.veritas.com via sendmail with P:esmtp/R:smart_host/T:smtp (sender: ) id for ; Fri, 5 May 2006 05:41:19 -0700 (PDT) (Smail-3.2.0.101 1997-Dec-17 #15 built 2001-Aug-30) Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 13:41:12 +0100 (BST) From: Hugh Dickins Subject: Re: Any reason for passing "tlb" to "free_pgtables()" by address? In-Reply-To: <445B2EBD.4020803@bull.net> Message-ID: References: <445B2EBD.4020803@bull.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Zoltan Menyhart Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Zoltan.Menyhart@free.fr List-ID: On Fri, 5 May 2006, Zoltan Menyhart wrote: > Apparently, there is no reason for passing "tlb" to "free_pgtables()" > by address, because there is no need for re-scheduling inside this > function => no other "mmu_gather" can / will be used. You're right. Well, actually, it's been shown that there _is_ a need for rescheduling inside that function (high latency), but we've not yet settled on the right way to go about that - mmu_gathering needs overhaul to avoid disabling preemption, something both Nick and I have worked on intermittently. Personally I'd prefer not to make your change right now - it seems a shame to make that cosmetic change without addressing the real latency issue; but I've no strong feeling against your patch. Hugh -- 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