On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 19:33:35 +0200
Blaisorblade <[email protected]> wrote:
> Again, about 4 month since last time (for lack of time) I'm sending for final
> review and for inclusion into -mm protection support for remap_file_pages (in
> short "RFP prot support"), i.e. setting per-pte protections (beyond file
> offset) through this syscall.
This all looks a bit too fresh and TODO-infested for me to put it in -mm at
this time.
I could toss them in to get some testing underway, but that makes life
complex for other ongoing MM work. (And there's a _lot_ of that - I
presently have >180 separate patches which alter ./mm/*).
Also, it looks like another round of detailed review is needed before this
work will really start to settle into its final form.
So.. I'll await version 5, sorry. Please persist.
Andrew Morton <[email protected]> ha scritto:
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 19:33:35 +0200
> Blaisorblade <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Again, about 4 month since last time (for lack of time) I'm
> sending for final
> > review and for inclusion into -mm protection support for
> remap_file_pages (in
> > short "RFP prot support"), i.e. setting per-pte protections
> (beyond file
> > offset) through this syscall.
> This all looks a bit too fresh and TODO-infested for me to put it
> in -mm at
> this time.
It is possible, subsequent rounds of review should be near to each
other, but calling the code "new" is maybe exaggerate. I do not
remember all these TODOs but I may forget (and I don't have my box
right now, so I can't check).
> I could toss them in to get some testing underway, but that makes
> life
> complex for other ongoing MM work. (And there's a _lot_ of that -
> I
> presently have >180 separate patches which alter ./mm/*).
That's fine. If this can help I could try to base next version
against -mm.
> Also, it looks like another round of detailed review is needed
> before this
> work will really start to settle into its final form.
That's ok, I prefer reviews to testing right now. Almost all but 1
patch (which is marked) is unit tested on i386, x86_64 and uml (but
if I don't have a multithreaded concurrent fault tester), so it's
time to catch remaining bugs by review.
> So.. I'll await version 5, sorry. Please persist.
I'll try. I just hope we'll not have it next summer (I know it's my
problem, I'm not complaining on you).
Thanks!
Bye
--
Paolo Giarrusso
Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale!
http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com