On Mon, 16 Apr 2007, David Rientjes wrote: > > > Compromise patch below: would that be satisfactory to you, David? > > I really like the patch, but for perhaps a slightly different reason: > we're only flushing ranges that have been shown to need it. We aren't > completely flushing the entire mm which is likely to be excessive in > situations where we're actually using /proc/pid/clear_refs in combination > with /proc/pid/smaps for memory footprint approximation (i.e. it's on a > fine granularity).
It would be more of a reason to like the patch, if more architectures actually implemented flush_tlb_range as anything different from flush_tlb_mm ;) Sadly, few can do better than flush_tlb_mm: ia64 is the exception I remember, and maybe a couple of others. I put flush_tlb_range there merely because it seems more appropriate, but it's rather deceptive. Hugh - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
