From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261326AbULZXZJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:25:09 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261343AbULZXZJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:25:09 -0500 Received: from albireo.enyo.de ([212.9.189.169]:29325 "EHLO albireo.enyo.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261326AbULZXZC (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:25:02 -0500 From: Florian Weimer To: Linus Torvalds Cc: 7eggert@gmx.de, Christoph Lameter , akpm@osdl.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Prezeroing V2 [3/4]: Add support for ZEROED and NOT_ZEROED free maps References: <87wtv464ty.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 00:24:56 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Linus Torvalds's message of "Sun, 26 Dec 2004 15:12:45 -0800 (PST)") Message-ID: <87llbk63sn.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Linus Torvalds: > Anyway, at this point I think the most interesting question is whether it > actually improves any macro-benchmark behaviour, rather than just a page > fault latency tester microbenchmark.. By the way, some crazy idea that occurred to me: What about incrementally scrubbing a page which has been assigned previously to this CPU, while spinning inside spinlocks (or busy-waiting somewhere else)?