From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 33A566B0085 for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2009 12:42:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 17:40:50 +0100 (BST) From: Hugh Dickins Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] mm: reinstate ZERO_PAGE In-Reply-To: <20090908153441.GB29902@wotan.suse.de> Message-ID: References: <20090908073119.GA29902@wotan.suse.de> <20090908153441.GB29902@wotan.suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Nick Piggin Cc: Andrew Morton , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , KOSAKI Motohiro , Linus Torvalds , Rik van Riel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 8 Sep 2009, Nick Piggin wrote: > On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 01:17:01PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > By the way, in compiling that list of "special" architectures, > > I was surprised not to find ia64 amongst them. Not that it > > matters to me, but I thought the Fujitsu guys were usually > > keen on Itanium - do they realize that the special test is > > excluding it, or do they have their own special patch for it? > > I don't understand your question. Are you asking whether they > know your patch will not enable zero pages on ia64? That's what I was meaning to ask, yes; but wondering whether perhaps they've already got their own patch to enable pte_special on ia64, and just haven't got around to sending it in yet. > > I guess pte special was primarily driven by gup_fast, which in > turn was driven primarily by DB2 9.5, which I think might be > only available on x86 and ibm's architectures. > > But I admit to being a curious as to when I'll see a gup_fast > patch come out of SGI or HP or Fujitsu :) Yes, me too! 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