From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] mm: de-skew page refcount
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 11:27:13 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0601181122120.3240@g5.osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060118170558.GE28418@wotan.suse.de>
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> > So I disagree with this patch series. It has real downsides. There's a
> > reason we have the offset.
>
> Yes, there is a reason, I detailed it in the changelog and got rid of it.
And I'm not applying it. I'd be crazy to replace good code by code that is
objectively _worse_.
The fact that you _document_ that it's worse doesn't make it any better.
The places that you improve (in the other patches) seem to have nothing at
all to do with the counter skew issue, so I don't see the point.
So let me repeat: WHY DID YOU MAKE THE CODE WORSE?
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-18 19:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-01-18 10:40 [patch 0/4] mm: de-skew page refcount Nick Piggin
2006-01-18 10:40 ` [patch 1/4] mm: page refcount use atomic primitives Nick Piggin
2006-01-18 10:40 ` [patch 2/4] mm: PageLRU no testset Nick Piggin
2006-01-19 17:48 ` Nikita Danilov
2006-01-19 18:10 ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-18 10:40 ` [patch 3/3] mm: PageActive " Nick Piggin
2006-01-18 14:13 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2006-01-19 14:50 ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-19 16:52 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2006-01-19 20:02 ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-19 21:41 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2006-01-18 10:41 ` [patch 4/4] mm: less atomic ops Nick Piggin
2006-01-18 16:38 ` [patch 0/4] mm: de-skew page refcount Linus Torvalds
2006-01-18 17:05 ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-18 19:27 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2006-01-19 14:00 ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-19 16:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-01-19 17:06 ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-19 17:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-01-19 17:38 ` Nick Piggin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0601181122120.3240@g5.osdl.org \
--to=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).