Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:57:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:57:20 -0500 Received: from host154.207-175-42.redhat.com ([207.175.42.154]:49956 "EHLO lacrosse.corp.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:57:07 -0500 Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:57:44 -0500 From: Benjamin LaHaise To: "David S. Miller" Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: please revert bogus patch to vmscan.c Message-ID: <20011029185743.M25434@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20011029184821.K25434@redhat.com> <20011029.155056.23033599.davem@redhat.com> <20011029185158.L25434@redhat.com> <20011029.155559.64018347.davem@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20011029.155559.64018347.davem@redhat.com>; from davem@redhat.com on Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 03:55:59PM -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 03:55:59PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > 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. See Paul's message. ia64 does the same thing with hardware walked hashed page tables. Now, do you want to pay for the 2 days of time you want me to commit to investigating something which is obvious to me? I don't think so. -ben - 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/