Re: [PATCH 0/7] abstract pagetable locking and pte updates
From: Christoph Lameter <hidden>
Date: 2004-11-02 00:19:31
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004, Nick Piggin wrote:
So it is a long way off from saying N architectures _do_ work, but the possibility is there.
There needs to be some fallback mechanism that allows to leave an arch the way it is now and it will still work right. Then one can say that all architectures will work.
quoted
What is unacceptable is the lack of research into the needs of arches that has been put into this. The general core changes proposed can never be adequate without a corresponding sweep of architecture- specific code. While I fully endorse the concept of lockless pagetable updates, there can be no correct implementation leaving architecture- specific code unswept. I would encourage whoever cares to pursue this to its logical conclusion to do the necessary reading, and audits, and review of architecture manuals instead of designing core API's in vacuums.Definitely - which is one of the reasons I posted it here, because I don't pretend to know all the arch details. But if you think I designed it in a vacuum you're wrong.
It is really a challenge to work with architectures that you cannot get your hands on. We need to pool our resources otherwise this will never work. -- 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: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>