Re: please revert bogus patch to vmscan.c
Rik van Riel (riel@conectiva.com.br)
Tue, 30 Oct 2001 13:34:50 -0200 (BRST)
On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 09:25:46PM -0500, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> > I fully well expect it to be. However, from the point of view of stability
> > we *want* to be conservative and correct. If Al had to demonstrate with
>
> Dave just told you what this change has to do with stability, not sure
> why you keep reiterating about stability and correctness.
>
> But of course going from page flush to the mm flush is fine from my part
> too. As Linus noted a few days ago during swapout we're going to block
> and reschedule all the time, so the range flush is going to be a noop in
Only on architectures where the TLB (or equivalent) is
small and only capable of holding entries for one address
space at a time.
It's simply not true on eg PPC.
Rik
--
DMCA, SSSCA, W3C? Who cares? http://thefreeworld.net/
http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/