From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 20:19:01 +0100 (BST) From: Hugh Dickins Subject: Re: vm changes from linux-2.6.14 to linux-2.6.15 In-Reply-To: <20070510.001234.126579706.davem@davemloft.net> Message-ID: References: <20070509231937.ea254c26.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1178778583.14928.210.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070510.001234.126579706.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: David Miller , Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, mark@mtfhpc.demon.co.uk, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, wli@holomorphy.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, andrea@suse.de, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 10 May 2007, David Miller wrote: > > > We never seemed to reach completion here? > > > > Well, I'm waiting for other people comments too... as I said earlier, > > I'm not too fan of burrying the update_mmu_cache() inside > > ptep_set_access_flags(), but perhaps we could remove the whole logic of > > reading the old PTE & comparing it, and instead have > > ptep_set_access_flags() do that locally and return to the caller wether > > a change occured that requires update_mmu_cache() to be called. > > > > That way, archs who don't actually need update_mmu_cache() under some > > circumstances will be able to return 0 there. > > > > What do you guys thing ? > > I think that's a good idea. I agree. 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