Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.6.11-rt26

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Tue, 5 Feb 2013, Qiang Huang wrote:
> On 2013/2/4 22:58, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >From patches-3.6.11-rt28.patch.gz, your patch x86-highmem-make-it-work.patch
> did this work. And you said
> "It had been enabled quite some time, but never really worked."
> 
> But I think there is a previous patch mm-rt-kmap-atomic-scheduling.patch did
> the job, so I think RT highmem on x86 should have worked.
> 
> Now with your patch, if we use kmap instead of kmap_atomic on RT, do we need
> to revert Peter's patch as well?

I should have done that, yes.
 
> I haven't tested it, but if Peter's patch did solved the problem, is his way
> better than use kmap? Because we can use more highmem virtual address,
> although with some switch latency in some small probability scenarios.

In theory it's better. Though I ran into some issues with that
approach. It's on my todo list to revisit that problem, but for now
the kmap way is at least safer.

Thanks,

	tglx