Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763186AbZFOPy7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:54:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751598AbZFOPyw (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:54:52 -0400 Received: from mk-filter-1-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com ([212.74.100.52]:43957 "EHLO mk-filter-1-a-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751331AbZFOPyv (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:54:51 -0400 X-Trace: 215590464/mk-filter-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com/B2C/$b2c-THROTTLED-DYNAMIC/b2c-CUSTOMER-DYNAMIC-IP/80.41.41.232/None/hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk X-SBRS: None X-RemoteIP: 80.41.41.232 X-IP-MAIL-FROM: hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk X-SMTP-AUTH: X-MUA: X-IP-BHB: Once X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnECAO8LNkpQKSno/2dsb2JhbAAI1iWEDQU X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.42,223,1243810800"; d="scan'208";a="215590464" Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:53:58 +0100 (BST) From: Hugh Dickins X-X-Sender: hugh@sister.anvils To: Izik Eidus cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ksm: write protect pages from inside ksm In-Reply-To: <4A3651D5.8020100@redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <1244843100-4128-1-git-send-email-ieidus@redhat.com> <4A3576C3.2040500@redhat.com> <4A358DA7.2080305@redhat.com> <4A35903A.3090508@redhat.com> <20090615035749.6f8236cc@woof.tlv.redhat.com> <4A3651D5.8020100@redhat.com> 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 Content-Length: 1467 Lines: 32 On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Izik Eidus wrote: > > So you dont have mmlist at all?, Good i think i found another problems with > the usage the RFC made with the mmlist, > Do you mind to send me the patch that move into diffrent mm list? or you still > want to wait? I'd really prefer to wait, there are too many questions I should resolve one way or another now I can test again e.g. do we need to put children on to the list when forking or not? But don't let me hold you up: if you believe you've problems sharing the mmlist, go ahead and separate out - I called the KSM one ksm_mmlist (surprise!), hanging off init_mm.ksm_mmlist in the same way mmlist does. And then you can get rid of the MMF flags etc (I've set aside your 4/4 as not something to get into right now - probably the release after). At present I'm still using mmlist_lock, but that's probably a mistake: we don't really want to have to consider unrelated lock ordering constraints, a ksm_mmlist_lock would be better for now. None of which precludes someone coming along later and combining ksm_mmlist with mmlist in order to save space: but for now I think we do better to keep them separate, and it sounds like you've seen a strong reason for that. Hugh -- 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/