From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:42:35 +0000
Subject: Re: page table lock patch V15 [0/7]: overview
Message-Id: <20050112014235.7095dcf4.akpm@osdl.org>
List-Id: <linux-ia64.vger.kernel.org>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0411221457240.2970-100000@localhost.localdomain>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0411221343410.22895@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0411221419440.20993@ppc970.osdl.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0411221424580.22895@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0411221429050.20993@ppc970.osdl.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0412011539170.5721@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0412011545060.5721@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0501041129030.805@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0501041137410.805@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
	<m1652ddljp.fsf@muc.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0501110937450.32744@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
	<41E4BCBE.2010001@yahoo.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <41E4BCBE.2010001@yahoo.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: clameter@sgi.com, torvalds@osdl.org, ak@muc.de, hugh@veritas.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org

Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> Christoph Lameter wrote:
>  > Changes from V14->V15 of this patch:
> 
>  Hi,
> 
>  I wonder what everyone thinks about moving forward with these patches?

I was waiting for them to settle down before paying more attention.

My general take is that these patches address a single workload on
exceedingly rare and expensive machines.  If they adversely affect common
and cheap machines via code complexity, memory footprint or via runtime
impact then it would be pretty hard to justify their inclusion.

Do we have measurements of the negative and/or positive impact on smaller
machines?