Re: [mm][RFC][PATCH 0/11] mm accessor updates.

Christoph Lameter
2009-12-17T20:42:37Z

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > That is why I think that the accessors are a good first step.
>
> They're not, they're daft, they operate on a global resource mm_struct,
> that's the whole problem, giving it a different name isn't going to
> solve anything.

It is not about naming. The accessors hide the locking mechanism for
mmap_sem. Then you can change the locking in a central place.

The locking may even become configurable later. Maybe an embedded solution
will want the existing scheme but dual quad socket may want a distributed
reference counter to avoid bouncing cachelines on faults.