lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Feb]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: page fault scalability patch V16 [3/4]: Drop page_table_lock in handle_mm_fault
From
Date
On Wed, 2005-02-02 at 14:09 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-02-01 at 18:49 -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Feb 2005, Nick Piggin wrote:

> > I mean we could just speculatively copy, risk copying crap and
> > discard that later when we find that the pte has changed. This would
> > simplify the function:
> >
>
> I think this may be the better approach. Anyone else?
>

Not to say it is perfect either. Normal semantics say not to touch
a page if it is not somehow pinned. So this may cause problems in
corner cases (DEBUG_PAGEALLOC comes to mind... hopefully nothing else).

But I think a plain read of the page when it isn't pinned is less
yucky than writing into the non-pinned struct page.




-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:10    [W:1.478 / U:0.232 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site