From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5AD7F6005A4 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 18:21:07 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4B4277B0.1080506@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2010 18:20:16 -0500 From: Rik van Riel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/8] Speculative pagefault -v3 References: <20100104182429.833180340@chello.nl> <4B42606F.3000906@redhat.com> <1262641573.6408.434.camel@laptop> In-Reply-To: <1262641573.6408.434.camel@laptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "minchan.kim@gmail.com" , cl@linux-foundation.org, "hugh.dickins" , Nick Piggin , Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds List-ID: On 01/04/2010 04:46 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2010-01-04 at 16:41 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: >> On 01/04/2010 01:24 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>> Patch series implementing speculative page faults for x86. >> >> Fun, but why do we need this? > > People were once again concerned with mmap_sem contention on threaded > apps on large machines. Kame-san posted some patches, but I felt they > weren't quite crazy enough ;-) In that case, I assume that somebody else (maybe Kame-san or Christoph) will end up posting a benchmark that shows how these patches help. -- All rights reversed. -- 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/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org