On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 00:35:19 -0700 (PDT) Christoph Lameter <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 00:22:26 -0700 (PDT) Christoph Lameter <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > I will submit pieces to mm depending on the
> > > outcome of our discussions.
>
> > There's a ludicrous amount of MM work pending in -mm. It would probably be
> > less work at your end to see what ends up landing in 2.6.22-rc1.
>
> I am aware of that and thats why I kept this against upstream. The need
> right now is for justification and explanation. I had to go
> through a head spinning series of VM layers to get an idea how to do
> this in a clean way and then had to make additional passes to do minimal
> modifications to get this working so that it is testable.
OK.
Don't get me wrong - I do think this is neat code and is a good way of
addressing the problem. (I'm surprised that the mmap protopatch didn't
touch rmap.c).
But I don't think it's a slam dunk and I would like you to appreciate the
constraints which I believe we operate under. And I don't think we've
adequately considered alternative solutions to the immediate performance problems.
> Performance tests please...
On various HBAs, please ;)
-
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]
