From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 1/6] mm: Don't unmap gup()ed page Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:32:52 +0200 Message-ID: <20090414143252.GE28265@random.random> References: <20090414151204.C647.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <2f11576a0904140639l426e137ewdc46296cdb377dd@mail.gmail.com> <20090414141209.GB31644@random.random> <200904150026.36142.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro , LKML , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Jeff Moyer , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Hugh Dickins To: Nick Piggin Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200904150026.36142.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 12:26:34AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > Andrea: I didn't veto that set_bit change of yours as such. I just I know you didn't ;) > noted there could be more atomic operations. Actually I would > welcome more comparison between our two approaches, but they seem Agree about the welcome of comparison, it'd be nice to measure it the enterprise workloads that showed the gup_fast gain in the first place. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org