From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267323AbUBSQER (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:04:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267321AbUBSQER (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:04:17 -0500 Received: from bi01p1.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.142]:40305 "EHLO linux.local") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267323AbUBSQEQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:04:16 -0500 Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 00:58:19 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Andrew Morton , Christoph Hellwig , arjanv@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: Non-GPL export of invalidate_mmap_range Message-ID: <20040219085819.GB1269@us.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@us.ibm.com References: <20040217073522.A25921@infradead.org> <20040217124001.GA1267@us.ibm.com> <20040217161929.7e6b2a61.akpm@osdl.org> <1077108694.4479.4.camel@laptop.fenrus.com> <20040218140021.GB1269@us.ibm.com> <20040218211035.A13866@infradead.org> <20040218150607.GE1269@us.ibm.com> <20040218222138.A14585@infradead.org> <20040218145132.460214b5.akpm@osdl.org> <20040219091132.GE17140@khan.acc.umu.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040219091132.GE17140@khan.acc.umu.se> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 10:11:32AM +0100, David Weinehall wrote: > On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 02:51:32PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > > > I don't understand why IBM is pushing this dubious change right now, > > > > It isn't a dubious change, on technical grounds. It is reasonable for a > > distributed filesystem to want to be able to shoot down pte's which map > > sections of pagecache. Just as it is reasonable for the filesystem to be > > able to shoot down the pagecache itself. > > > > We've exported much lower-level stuff than this, because some in-kernel > > module happened to use it. > > Probably not always the right choice, though... I highly suspect we > far to much of our intestines are easily available. Again, the whole point of the patch is to -reduce- the degree of intestinal export. Thanx, Paul