Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: "fb-defio: fix page list with concurrent processes" | From | Markus Armbruster <> | Date | Tue, 17 Jun 2008 11:31:35 +0200 |
| |
"Jaya Kumar" <jayakumar.lkml@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:34 AM, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote: >> "Jaya Kumar" <jayakumar.lkml@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote: >>>> Your patch "fb-defio: fix page list with concurrent processes" definitely >>>> seems to help with the suspend/resume problem I had with the Xen pvfb >>>> device. Is it queued up anywhere? It seems to be a real bugfix, and should >>>> probably be queued for 2.6.26... >>> >>> It isn't currently queued. I had intended to improve its performance >>> by taking advantage of Andrew's suggestion of using !list_empty on the >>> page->lru to avoid walking the page list to find the duplicate page, >>> but I ran into trouble since the page starts off being on the lru >>> list. I'll try to take a look at doing this next weekend. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> jaya >> >> Well, we got a bug that makes the code useless in practice for us, and >> a fix for it that's not quite as fast as it could be. Which is >> better, somewhat slow code, or somewhat useless code? I'd like to see >> the fix merged as soon as possible. You can always improve its >> performance later. >> > > Ok, I didn't realize there was any time pressure. Keep in mind, I'm > just a person doing this stuff for fun on weekends not someone under > commercial pressures. Yup, I've got no problem if the old patch is > requeued and merged. > > Thanks, > jaya
Hey, it's your own fault! If you wrote useless code in your spare time, we wouldn't bother you ;->
Seriously, I appreciate your contributions, and I didn't mean to pressure you. Just to explain why I think it makes sense to merge your fix now, and performance improvements later.
| |