On 2021/3/17 8:27, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> On 3/15/21 11:49 PM, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>> On 2021/3/16 11:07, Mike Kravetz wrote:
>>> On 3/15/21 7:27 PM, Miaohe Lin wrote:
The fault_mutex hashing overhead can be avoided in truncate_op case
because page faults can not race with truncation in this
On 3/15/21 11:49 PM, Miaohe Lin wrote:
> On 2021/3/16 11:07, Mike Kravetz wrote:
>> On 3/15/21 7:27 PM, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>>> The fault_mutex hashing overhead can be avoided in truncate_op case
>>> because page faults can not race with truncation in this routine. So
>>> calculate hash for fault_mu
On 2021/3/16 11:07, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> On 3/15/21 7:27 PM, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>> The fault_mutex hashing overhead can be avoided in truncate_op case
>> because page faults can not race with truncation in this routine. So
>> calculate hash for fault_mutex only in !truncate_op case to save some cp
On 3/15/21 7:27 PM, Miaohe Lin wrote:
> The fault_mutex hashing overhead can be avoided in truncate_op case
> because page faults can not race with truncation in this routine. So
> calculate hash for fault_mutex only in !truncate_op case to save some cpu
> cycles.
>
> Reviewed-by: Mike Kravetz
>
The fault_mutex hashing overhead can be avoided in truncate_op case
because page faults can not race with truncation in this routine. So
calculate hash for fault_mutex only in !truncate_op case to save some cpu
cycles.
Reviewed-by: Mike Kravetz
Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin
Cc: Mike Kravetz
---
v1
5 matches
Mail list logo