On Mon, 2014-10-20 at 23:56 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Hi, > > I figured I'd give my 2010 speculative fault series another spin: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/1/4/257 > > Since then I think many of the outstanding issues have changed sufficiently to > warrant another go. In particular Al Viro's delayed fput seems to have made it > entirely 'normal' to delay fput(). Lai Jiangshan's SRCU rewrite provided us > with call_srcu() and my preemptible mmu_gather removed the TLB flushes from > under the PTL. > > The code needs way more attention but builds a kernel and runs the > micro-benchmark so I figured I'd post it before sinking more time into it. > > I realize the micro-bench is about as good as it gets for this series and not > very realistic otherwise, but I think it does show the potential benefit the > approach has. > > (patches go against .18-rc1+) I think patch 2/6 is borken: error: patch failed: mm/memory.c:2025 error: mm/memory.c: patch does not apply and related, as you mention, I would very much welcome having the introduction of 'struct faut_env' as a separate cleanup patch. May I suggest renaming it to fault_cxt? Thanks, Davidlohr -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>