Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 16:39:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 16:39:51 -0400 Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([12.44.186.158]:24051 "EHLO hermes.mvista.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 16:39:50 -0400 Subject: Re: [patch 1/13] minimal rmap From: Robert Love To: Rik van Riel Cc: Daniel Phillips , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , lkml In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 Date: 17 Jul 2002 13:42:41 -0700 Message-Id: <1026938562.1085.59.camel@sinai> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1182 Lines: 31 On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 13:37, Rik van Riel wrote: > I don't agree with this, for a very simple reason. > > The current rmap patch was created in order to change the > VM behaviour as little as possible and ONLY provide an > infrastructure. Benchmarking a completely untuned thing > that was built to not change anything is bound to give > meaningless results. > > I say we _use_ the infrastructure that akpm is trying to > get merged now in order to implement something useful. I do agree with Rik here. Once the basic rmap infrastructure is merged we need to work on implementing stuff on top of it or else there is no point. If we cannot show the infrastructure is useful, then Linus will surely rip rmap out of the kernel in time. Summary: once it is in and seems correct we need to start providing (in _pieces_) parts from Rik's full rmap patch and other VM-related code for 2.5 to see where rmap can take us... Robert Love - 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/