On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 13:53 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 09:14 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > In fact, with such a flag, we could probably avoid the ifdef entirely, and > > always go toward the PTE fixup path when called in such a fixup case, my gut > > feeling is that this is going to be seldom enough not to hurt x86 measurably > > but we'll have to try it out. > > > > That leads to that even less tested patch: > > And here's a version that builds (still not tested :-) > > Shan, can you verify whether that fixes the problem for you ? > > I also had a cursory glance at the ARM code and it seems to rely on the > same stuff as embedded powerpc does for dirty/young updates, so in > theory it should exhibit the same problem. > > I suspect the scenario is rare enough in practice in embedded workloads > that nobody noticed until now.
Ignore that bogus send, I sent a proper one immediately after (evolution FAIL, sorry about that) Cheers, Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
