Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:55:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:55:30 -0500 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:12180 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:55:25 -0500 Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 15:55:59 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <20011029.155559.64018347.davem@redhat.com> To: bcrl@redhat.com Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: please revert bogus patch to vmscan.c From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <20011029185158.L25434@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20011029184821.K25434@redhat.com> <20011029.155056.23033599.davem@redhat.com> <20011029185158.L25434@redhat.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.0 on Emacs 21.0 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Benjamin LaHaise Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:51:58 -0500 On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 03:50:56PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > > Numbers talk, bullshit walks. There is a correct way to do this optimization. If you're enough of an asshole to not care about doing it that way, great! Doing range flushes is not the answer. It is going to be about the same cost as doing per-page flushes. The cost is doing the cross calls at all, not the granularity in which we do them. You're refusing to do any work to prove whether your case matters at all in real life, and you're calling other people assholes for asking that you do so. Franks a lot, David S. Miller davem@redhat.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/