From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B12A48D0041 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 16:08:24 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:07:19 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/20] mm: Remove i_mmap_lock lockbreak Message-Id: <20110419130719.86093a27.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20110401121725.991633993@chello.nl> References: <20110401121258.211963744@chello.nl> <20110401121725.991633993@chello.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Andrea Arcangeli , Avi Kivity , Thomas Gleixner , Rik van Riel , Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Benjamin Herrenschmidt , David Miller , Hugh Dickins , Mel Gorman , Nick Piggin , Paul McKenney , Yanmin Zhang On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 14:13:12 +0200 Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Hugh says: > "The only significant loser, I think, would be page reclaim (when > concurrent with truncation): could spin for a long time waiting for > the i_mmap_mutex it expects would soon be dropped? " > > Counter points: > - cpu contention makes the spin stop (need_resched()) > - zap pages should be freeing pages at a higher rate than reclaim > ever can > > I think the simplification of the truncate code is definately worth it. Well, we don't need to guess. These things are testable! -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org