On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Lee Revell wrote: > On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 20:53 +0000, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > > Please replace by new patch below, which I'm now running through lmbench. > > > > That second patch seems fine, and I see no lmbench regression from it. > > Should go into 2.6.11, right?
That's up to Andrew (and Linus). I was thinking that way when I rushed you the patch. But given that you have remaining unresolved latency issues nearby (zap_pte_range, clear_page_range), and given the warning shot that I screwed up my first attempt, I'd be inclined to say hold off. It's a pity: for a while we were thinking 2.6.11 would be a big step forward for mainline latency; but it now looks to me like these tests have come too late in the cycle to be dealt with safely. In other mail, you do expect people still to be using Ingo's patches, so probably this patch should stick there (and in -mm) for now. Hugh - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/