On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 12:28:41PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:Not sure why you prefer to waste ram when MMU_NOTIFIER=n, this is a regression (a minor one though). It's out of my reach how can you be ok with lock=1. You said you have to block, if you can deal with lock=1 once, why can't you deal with lock=1 _always_? The down_write is garbage. The caller should put it around mmu_notifier_register if something. The same way the caller should call synchronize_rcu after mmu_notifier_register if it needs synchronous behavior from the notifiers. The default version of mmu_notifier_register shouldn't be cluttered with unnecessary locking. --
| Benjamin Herrenschmidt | Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway |
| Daniel Walker | Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS] |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
| Andrew Morton | -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 |
git: | |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Hannes Eder | [PATCH 01/43] drivers/net/at1700.c: fix sparse warning: symbol shadows an earlier ... |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 16/37] dccp: API to query the current TX/RX CCID |
| Herbert Xu | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
