On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 4:14 AM, Avi Kivity a...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/13/2010 11:10 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
On Thu, 2010-08-05 at 12:28 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/04/2010 10:13 AM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
mmu_shrink() should attempt to free @nr_to_scan entries.
This conflicts with
On 08/13/2010 11:10 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
On Thu, 2010-08-05 at 12:28 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/04/2010 10:13 AM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
mmu_shrink() should attempt to free @nr_to_scan entries.
This conflicts with Dave's patchset.
Dave, what's going on with those patches? They're
On Thu, 2010-08-05 at 12:28 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/04/2010 10:13 AM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
mmu_shrink() should attempt to free @nr_to_scan entries.
This conflicts with Dave's patchset.
Dave, what's going on with those patches? They're starting to smell.
These seem to fix the
On Thu, 2010-08-05 at 12:28 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/04/2010 10:13 AM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
mmu_shrink() should attempt to free @nr_to_scan entries.
This conflicts with Dave's patchset.
Dave, what's going on with those patches? They're starting to smell.
The hardware and test
On 08/04/2010 10:13 AM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
mmu_shrink() should attempt to free @nr_to_scan entries.
This conflicts with Dave's patchset.
Dave, what's going on with those patches? They're starting to smell.
@@ -3138,37 +3138,51 @@ static int mmu_shrink(struct shrinker *shrink, int
mmu_shrink() should attempt to free @nr_to_scan entries.
Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan la...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
index 9c69725..1034373 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
@@ -3138,37 +3138,51 @@ static int mmu_shrink(struct
