From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S261511AbULBBqP@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S261511AbULBBqP (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:46:15 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261541AbULBBqP
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:46:15 -0500
Received: from omx1-ext.sgi.com ([192.48.179.11]:19917 "EHLO
	omx1.americas.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S261511AbULBBqL (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:46:11 -0500
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 17:46:04 -0800 (PST)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
X-X-Sender: clameter@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, hugh@veritas.com,
       benh@kernel.crashing.org, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, linux-mm@kvack.org,
       linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: page fault scalability patch V12 [0/7]: Overview and performance
 tests
In-Reply-To: <20041201165538.015ee7a6.akpm@osdl.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0412011745090.6430@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0411221457240.2970-100000@localhost.localdomain>
 <Pine.LNX.4.58.0411221343410.22895@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
 <Pine.LNX.4.58.0411221419440.20993@ppc970.osdl.org>
 <Pine.LNX.4.58.0411221424580.22895@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
 <Pine.LNX.4.58.0411221429050.20993@ppc970.osdl.org>
 <Pine.LNX.4.58.0412011539170.5721@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
 <Pine.LNX.4.58.0412011608500.22796@ppc970.osdl.org> <20041201165538.015ee7a6.akpm@osdl.org>
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

On Wed, 1 Dec 2004, Andrew Morton wrote:

> > Ok, consider me convinced. I don't want to apply this before I get 2.6.10
> > out the door, but I'm happy with it.
>
> There were concerns about some architectures relying upon page_table_lock
> for exclusivity within their own pte handling functions.  Have they all
> been resolved?

The patch will fall back on the page_table_lock if an architecture cannot
provide atomic pte operations.