Re: anon_vma RFC2

Hugh Dickins
2004-03-13T17:53:37Z

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> I certainly agree it's simpler. I'm quite undecided if to giveup on the
> anon_vma and to use anonmm plus your unshared during mremap at the
> moment, while it's simpler it's also a definitely inferior solution

I think you should persist with anon_vma and I should resurrect
anonmm, and let others decide between those two and pte_chains.

But while in this trial phase, can we both do it in such a way as to
avoid too much trivial change all over the tree? For example, I'm
thinking I need to junk my irrelevant renaming of put_dirty_page to
put_stack_page, and for the moment it would help if you cut out your
mapping -> as.mapping changes (when I came to build yours, I had to
go through various filesystems I had in my config updating them
accordingly). It's a correct change (which I was too lazy to do,
used evil casting instead) but better left as a tidyup for later?

Hugh