Hi Hugh!! On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 11:49:11AM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote: > [I'm scarcely following the mmu notifiers to-and-fro, which seems > to be in good hands, amongst faster thinkers than me: who actually > need and can test this stuff. Don't let me slow you down; but I > can quickly clarify on this history.]
Still I think it'd be great if you could review mmu-notifier-core v14. You and Nick are the core VM maintainers so it'd be great to hear any feedback about it. I think it's fairly easy to classify the patch as obviously safe as long as mmu notifiers are disarmed. Here a link for your convenience. http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/andrea/patches/v2.6/2.6.25/mmu-notifier-v14/mmu-notifier-core > No, the locking was different as you had it, Andrea: there was an extra > bitspin lock, carried over from the pte_chains days (maybe we changed > the name, maybe we disagreed over the name, I forget), which mainly > guarded the page->mapcount. I thought that was one lock more than we > needed, and eliminated it in favour of atomic page->mapcount in 2.6.9. Thanks a lot for the explanation! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
