Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 16 Nov 2012 17:08:52 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 06/43] mm: numa: Make pte_numa() and pmd_numa() a generic implementation |
| |
* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:41 AM, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> wrote: > > > > I would have preferred asm-generic/pgtable.h myself and use > > __HAVE_ARCH_whatever tricks > > PLEASE NO! > > Dammit, why is this disease still so prevalent, and why do people > continue to do this crap?
Also, why is this done in a weird, roundabout way of first picking up a bad patch and then modifying it and making it even worse?
Why not use something what we have in numa/core already:
f05ea0948708 mm/mpol: Create special PROT_NONE infrastructure
AFAICS, this portion of numa/core:
c740b1cccdcb x86/mm: Completely drop the TLB flush from ptep_set_access_flags() 02743c9c03f1 mm/mpol: Use special PROT_NONE to migrate pages b33467764d8a mm/migrate: Introduce migrate_misplaced_page() db4aa58db59a numa, mm: Support NUMA hinting page faults from gup/gup_fast ca2ea0747a5b mm/mpol: Add MPOL_MF_LAZY f05ea0948708 mm/mpol: Create special PROT_NONE infrastructure 37081a3de2bf mm/mpol: Check for misplaced page cd203e33c39d mm/mpol: Add MPOL_MF_NOOP 88f4670789e3 mm/mpol: Make MPOL_LOCAL a real policy 83babc0d2944 mm/pgprot: Move the pgprot_modify() fallback definition to mm.h 536165ead34b sched, numa, mm, MIPS/thp: Add pmd_pgprot() implementation 6fe64360a759 mm: Only flush the TLB when clearing an accessible pte e9df40bfeb25 x86/mm: Introduce pte_accessible() 3f2b613771ec mm/thp: Preserve pgprot across huge page split a5a608d83e0e sched, numa, mm, s390/thp: Implement pmd_pgprot() for s390 995334a2ee83 sched, numa, mm: Describe the NUMA scheduling problem formally 7ee9d9209c57 sched, numa, mm: Make find_busiest_queue() a method 4fd98847ba5c x86/mm: Only do a local tlb flush in ptep_set_access_flags() d24fc0571afb mm/generic: Only flush the local TLB in ptep_set_access_flags()
is a good foundation already with no WIP policy bits in it.
Mel, could you please work on this basis, or point out the bits you don't agree with so I can fix it?
Since I'm working on improving the policy bits I essentially need and have done all the 'foundation' work already - you might as well reuse it as-is instead of rebasing it?
Thanks,
Ingo
| |