On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 11:38:54AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > This is true, but I don't think such a change belongs in this patch > > series. If this series gets merged, then it would be sensible to investigate > > if refcounting anon_vma is a good idea or would it be a bouncing write-shared > > cacheline mess. > > SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU is there to avoid the cooling of hot cachelines by > RCU. > Then even if we move to a full ref-count, it might still be a good idea to preserve the SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU. -- Mel Gorman Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>