From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 16:28:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Sparsemem Virtual Memmap V5 In-Reply-To: <20070714082736.10af5f13.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-ID: References: <617E1C2C70743745A92448908E030B2A01EA65B9@scsmsx411.amr.corp.intel.com> <20070714082736.10af5f13.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: tony.luck@intel.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, apw@shadowen.org, npiggin@suse.de, mel@csn.ul.ie List-ID: On Sat, 14 Jul 2007, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > I'd be very surprised if there is any difference because the IA64 code for > > virtual memmap is the source of ideas and implementation for SPARSE_VIRTUAL. > > > Maybe pfn_valid() implementation is different from ? Right but that should increase the speed and not decrease it since we do not have the CONFIG HOLES anymore. -- 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