On Sat, 26 Mar 2005, Russell King wrote:
>
> I don't think it'll be invasive to push my get_pgd_slow() fix before
> these freepgt patches appear. For the record, this is the patch I'm
> using at present. With a bit more effort, I could probably eliminate
> pmd_alloc (and therefore the unnecessary spinlocking) here.
Your get_pgd_slow patch looks good to me. Yes, it slightly increases
the assumptions here about what is done in common, to the extent of a
pmd_populate, but even the nr_page_table_pages adjustment just nicely
balances what you were already having to do in free_pgd_slow.
Sorry for dumping you suddenly into this with my BUG_ON(mm->nr_ptes),
but I think we all agree it's a worthwhile check now. And sorry for
being so slow to respond, but I needed to think through what's right
for your case.
I'll write separately about Nick's FIRST_USER_ADDRESS patch,
I'm still puzzled, and not quite happy with that one.
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
