Hello everyone,
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 01:12:41PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > That, however, truly is a separate virtual memory feature. Would it
> > be possible for you to take MADV_FREE and MADV_REVIVE as a base and
> > implement an
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 10:12:40AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
>> On 04/29/2014 02:21 PM, John Stultz wrote:
>> > Another few weeks and another volatile ranges patchset...
>> >
>> > After getting the sense that the a major objection to the
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Johannes Weiner han...@cmpxchg.org wrote:
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 10:12:40AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
On 04/29/2014 02:21 PM, John Stultz wrote:
Another few weeks and another volatile ranges patchset...
After getting the sense that the a major objection to
Hello everyone,
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 01:12:41PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Johannes Weiner han...@cmpxchg.org wrote:
That, however, truly is a separate virtual memory feature. Would it
be possible for you to take MADV_FREE and MADV_REVIVE as a base and
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 10:12:40AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 04/29/2014 02:21 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> > Another few weeks and another volatile ranges patchset...
> >
> > After getting the sense that the a major objection to the earlier
> > patches was the introduction of a new syscall (and
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 10:12:40AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
On 04/29/2014 02:21 PM, John Stultz wrote:
Another few weeks and another volatile ranges patchset...
After getting the sense that the a major objection to the earlier
patches was the introduction of a new syscall (and its
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 10:04:49AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 05/07/2014 10:58 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 02:21:19PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> >> Another few weeks and another volatile ranges patchset...
> >>
> >> After getting the sense that the a major objection to
On 04/29/2014 02:21 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> Another few weeks and another volatile ranges patchset...
>
> After getting the sense that the a major objection to the earlier
> patches was the introduction of a new syscall (and its somewhat
> strange dual length/purged-bit return values), I spent
On 05/07/2014 10:58 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 02:21:19PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
>> Another few weeks and another volatile ranges patchset...
>>
>> After getting the sense that the a major objection to the earlier
>> patches was the introduction of a new syscall (and its
On 05/07/2014 10:58 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 02:21:19PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
Another few weeks and another volatile ranges patchset...
After getting the sense that the a major objection to the earlier
patches was the introduction of a new syscall (and its somewhat
On 04/29/2014 02:21 PM, John Stultz wrote:
Another few weeks and another volatile ranges patchset...
After getting the sense that the a major objection to the earlier
patches was the introduction of a new syscall (and its somewhat
strange dual length/purged-bit return values), I spent some
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 10:04:49AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
On 05/07/2014 10:58 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 02:21:19PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
Another few weeks and another volatile ranges patchset...
After getting the sense that the a major objection to the earlier
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 02:21:19PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> Another few weeks and another volatile ranges patchset...
>
> After getting the sense that the a major objection to the earlier
> patches was the introduction of a new syscall (and its somewhat
> strange dual length/purged-bit return
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 02:21:19PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
Another few weeks and another volatile ranges patchset...
After getting the sense that the a major objection to the earlier
patches was the introduction of a new syscall (and its somewhat
strange dual length/purged-bit return
Another few weeks and another volatile ranges patchset...
After getting the sense that the a major objection to the earlier
patches was the introduction of a new syscall (and its somewhat
strange dual length/purged-bit return values), I spent some time
trying to rework the vma manipulations so we
Another few weeks and another volatile ranges patchset...
After getting the sense that the a major objection to the earlier
patches was the introduction of a new syscall (and its somewhat
strange dual length/purged-bit return values), I spent some time
trying to rework the vma manipulations so we
16 matches
Mail list logo
