From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751233AbVHYR02 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:26:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751239AbVHYR02 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:26:28 -0400 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:13732 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751233AbVHYR01 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:26:27 -0400 From: Andi Kleen To: Zachary Amsden Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64 Avoid some atomic operations during address space destruction Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 19:26:09 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Pratap Subrahmanyam , Andrew Morton References: <42F5FB9A.5000708@vmware.com> <200508251854.10060.ak@suse.de> <430DFC14.50906@vmware.com> In-Reply-To: <430DFC14.50906@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200508251926.11219.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 25 August 2005 19:12, Zachary Amsden wrote: > Andi Kleen wrote: > >On Sunday 07 August 2005 14:16, Zachary Amsden wrote: > > > > > >FYI I have queued it, but cannot apply it because the necessary generic > >code support is still not in mainline. > > Here's the patch for generic / i386 support; it's already in the -mm tree. I'll probably not put that into my tree because I try to avoid generic patches of other people - i assume it's queued for mainline. If you want you can include the x86-64 patch with that submission too (it's fine for me), alternatively I'll submit it later when I do the next merge from i386 (that might take some time though) or remember about it for some other reason. > > >Do you have any other optimizations pending for x86-64? > > > >There is still the iopl optimization that you did that is on my TODO list > > to add. Anything else. > > I started porting the IOPL work, but got confused in my tree and end up > patching asm-i386 with x86-64 code. The joy of unenforced source control! Ok. When you don't get around to it I'll eventually. > > I have some other MMU optimizations pending that will hopefully be a win > for all architectures; still measuring which alternative is best there. Ok. Thanks. Please keep me updated on that. -Andi