From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965218Ab0CMBJb (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:09:31 -0500 Received: from www.tglx.de ([62.245.132.106]:36100 "EHLO www.tglx.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936024Ab0CMBJZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:09:25 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 02:08:51 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Suresh Siddha cc: Robin Holt , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "x86@kernel.org" Subject: Re: [Patch] x86,pat Update the page flags for memtype atomically instead of using memtype_lock. In-Reply-To: <1268439313.2793.148.camel@sbs-t61.sc.intel.com> Message-ID: References: <20100311161700.GC5685@sgi.com> <1268439313.2793.148.camel@sbs-t61.sc.intel.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 12 Mar 2010, Suresh Siddha wrote: > On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 08:17 -0800, Robin Holt wrote: > > Changes since -V1: > > 1) Introduce atomically setting and clearing the page flags and not > > using the global memtype_lock to protect page->flags. > > > > 2) This allowed me the opportunity to convert the rwlock back into a > > spinlock and not affect _MY_ tests performance as all the pages my test > > was utilizing are tracked by struct pages. > > Can you also include this spinlock to rwlock conversion, which can be > used for non RAM pages as a second patch? spinlock -> rwlock conversion ? I hope you meant it the other way round as Robin said in #2 :) And yes it should be a separate patch. Thanks, tglx