From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759502Ab2KAKtv (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Nov 2012 06:49:51 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:33930 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756518Ab2KAKtu (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Nov 2012 06:49:50 -0400 Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 10:49:45 +0000 From: Mel Gorman To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Rik van Riel , Andrea Arcangeli , Johannes Weiner , Thomas Gleixner , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Gerald Schaefer , Martin Schwidefsky , Heiko Carstens , Peter Zijlstra , Ralf Baechle , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/31] sched, numa, mm, s390/thp: Implement pmd_pgprot() for s390 Message-ID: <20121101104945.GQ3888@suse.de> References: <20121025121617.617683848@chello.nl> <20121025124832.996734608@chello.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121025124832.996734608@chello.nl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 02:16:24PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > From: Gerald Schaefer > > This patch adds an implementation of pmd_pgprot() for s390, > in preparation to future THP changes. > The additional pmd_pgprot implementations only are necessary if we want to preserve the PROT_NONE protections across a split but that somewhat forces that PROT_NONE be used as the protection bit across all architectures. Is that possible? I think I would prefer that prot-protection-across-splits just went away until it was proven necessary and potentially recoded in terms of _PAGE_NUMA and friends instead. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx150.postini.com [74.125.245.150]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2F2FE6B0078 for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 06:49:51 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 10:49:45 +0000 From: Mel Gorman Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/31] sched, numa, mm, s390/thp: Implement pmd_pgprot() for s390 Message-ID: <20121101104945.GQ3888@suse.de> References: <20121025121617.617683848@chello.nl> <20121025124832.996734608@chello.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121025124832.996734608@chello.nl> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Rik van Riel , Andrea Arcangeli , Johannes Weiner , Thomas Gleixner , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Gerald Schaefer , Martin Schwidefsky , Heiko Carstens , Peter Zijlstra , Ralf Baechle , Ingo Molnar On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 02:16:24PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > From: Gerald Schaefer > > This patch adds an implementation of pmd_pgprot() for s390, > in preparation to future THP changes. > The additional pmd_pgprot implementations only are necessary if we want to preserve the PROT_NONE protections across a split but that somewhat forces that PROT_NONE be used as the protection bit across all architectures. Is that possible? I think I would prefer that prot-protection-across-splits just went away until it was proven necessary and potentially recoded in terms of _PAGE_NUMA and friends instead. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- 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