On Mon, 2014-12-01 at 17:01 -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 11:43 PM, Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> At present, kernel supports madvise(MADV_FREE), so can benefit to all > >>> related architectures (can grep MADV_WILLNEED or MADV_REMOVE in "arch/" > >>> to know about all related architectures). > >> > >> A similar patch has been posted a while ago: > >> > >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg81538.html > > > > Would it be possible to use the same number everywhere? > > Yes please. It's ridiculous that we still need patches like this. > > I proposed unifying all this two years ago, but didn't follow up. > > From glibc's perspective it would be simpler if we started using the > same number everywhere. > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-api/msg02064.html Please co-ordinate with Andrew then because he's intent on merging this patch: http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm-commits&m=141747572930808 James
