mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org,
	Adam Litke <agl@us.ibm.com>, Andy Whitworth <apw@shadowen.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Consolidate lots of hugepage code
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 20:48:17 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041029034817.GY12934@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041029033708.GF12247@zax>

On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 01:37:08PM +1000, David Gibson wrote:
> wA lot of the code in arch/*/mm/hugetlbpage.c is quite similar.  This
> patch attempts to consolidate a lot of the code across the arch's,
> putting the combined version in mm/hugetlb.c.  There are a couple of
> uglyish hacks in order to cover all the hugepage archs, but the result
> is a very large reduction in the total amount of code.  It also means
> things like hugepage lazy allocation could be implemented in one
> place, instead of six.
> As yet this is entirely untested, except on ppc64.  Comments?
> Objections?  Testing acks?
> Notes:
> 	- this patch changes the meaning of set_huge_pte() to be more
> 	  analagous to set_pte()
> 	- does SH4 need special huge_ptep_get_and_clear()??

Further consolidation is premature given that outstanding hugetlb bugs
have the implication that architectures' needs are not being served by
the current arch/core split. I have at least two relatively major hugetlb
bugs outstanding, the lack of a flush_dcache_page() analogue first, and
another (soon to be a reported to affected distros) less well-understood.
Unless they're directly toward the end of restoring hugetlb to a sound
state, they're counterproductive to merge before patches doing so.

-- wli

  reply	other threads:[~2004-10-29  3:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-10-29  3:37 David Gibson
2004-10-29  3:48 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]
2004-11-07 17:20   ` Anton Blanchard
2004-11-07 19:20     ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-11-07 19:30       ` Anton Blanchard
2004-11-07 21:09         ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-11-07 21:22           ` Anton Blanchard
2004-11-07 22:49             ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-11-20 15:38               ` Anton Blanchard

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=20041029034817.GY12934@holomorphy.com \
    --to=wli@holomorphy.com \
    --cc=agl@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=apw@shadowen.org \
    --cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org \
    /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

Powered by JetHome