Re: please revert bogus patch to vmscan.c

[Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>]

On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 05:13:53PM +0100, Giuliano Pochini wrote:
> 
> >> But of course going from page flush to the mm flush is fine from my part
> >> too. As Linus noted a few days ago during swapout we're going to block
> >> and reschedule all the time, so the range flush is going to be a noop in
> > 
> > Only on architectures where the TLB (or equivalent) is
> > small and only capable of holding entries for one address
> > space at a time.
> > 
> > It's simply not true on eg PPC.
> 
> #ifdef ?

yes, but not for ppc, for alpha and all other archs without accessed bit
provided in hardware (and cached in the tlb). the flush_mm proposed by
Ben looks fine for x86 too, it's a waste only for archs without accessed
bit.

I think an #ifndef HAVE_NO_ACCESS_BIT_IN_TLB or something like that,
then define that in asm-alpha/ and the other archs without accessed bit.

OTOH, it probably doesn't make much difference so maybe it doesn't worth
the effort.

Andrea