On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 06:37:25AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 06/03/2013 03:50 PM, Daniel Forrest wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:29:54PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >> On 08/21/2012 11:20 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:39:26AM -0700, Michel Lespinasse
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 06:37:25AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
On 06/03/2013 03:50 PM, Daniel Forrest wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:29:54PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
On 08/21/2012 11:20 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:39:26AM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
On 06/03/2013 03:50 PM, Daniel Forrest wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:29:54PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
On 08/21/2012 11:20 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:39:26AM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
Instead of adding an atomic count for page references, we could limit
On 06/03/2013 03:50 PM, Daniel Forrest wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:29:54PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
On 08/21/2012 11:20 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:39:26AM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
Instead of adding an atomic count for page references, we could limit
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:29:54PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 08/21/2012 11:20 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> >On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:39:26AM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> >>Instead of adding an atomic count for page references, we could limit
> >>the anon_vma stacking depth. In fork,
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:29:54PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
On 08/21/2012 11:20 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:39:26AM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
Instead of adding an atomic count for page references, we could limit
the anon_vma stacking depth. In fork, we would
On 08/21/2012 11:20 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:39:26AM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
Instead of adding an atomic count for page references, we could limit
the anon_vma stacking depth. In fork, we would only clone anon_vmas
that have a low enough generation count.
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:39:26AM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> Instead of adding an atomic count for page references, we could limit
> the anon_vma stacking depth. In fork, we would only clone anon_vmas
> that have a low enough generation count. I think that's not great
> (adds a special
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:39:26AM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
Instead of adding an atomic count for page references, we could limit
the anon_vma stacking depth. In fork, we would only clone anon_vmas
that have a low enough generation count. I think that's not great
(adds a special case
On 08/21/2012 11:20 PM, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 02:39:26AM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
Instead of adding an atomic count for page references, we could limit
the anon_vma stacking depth. In fork, we would only clone anon_vmas
that have a low enough generation count.
10 matches
Mail list logo